DSLR with flip up LCD

[Roy Ehman]

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by tradition?

=Roy=

 

[Glen Tang]

In an SLR, a mirror lies in between the lens and the sensor to reflect the light up to the eyepiece. When you take a pic, the mirror flips up first.

Since digital cameras use the sensor to do the LCD preview, you would only see the back of the mirror with the SLR.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/camera7.htm

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

 

[wilfredmrand]

Then it wouldn't be an SLR. It would just be another EVF camera that looks like an slr. Seriously folks, that day may eventually come but most of us SLR-ers prefer to look through a reticle (analog), hear the click of the mechanical actuation (analog), shoot all day on a single charge (electric but analog) and still get a high quality digital image. The money in DSLR manufacture goes to durable, long lasting, high quality buildout - and EVF will wait until battery life can support an EVF system for 500-1000 shots between charges.

From a cost perspective, the SLR mechanism is highly perfected and almost failsafe from establishd optical camera companies (guess that excludes Sony), and so is the lens-and-mount system....to say nothing of optics the 717's and 828's of this world can't match.

Given this choice, I'll take the higher quality of the SLR system over the convenience of EVF any day. (I AM going to buy my wife an EVF camera, though.)
--
Wilfred M Rand
http://www.pbase.com/wilfredmrand/

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

 

[Roy Ehman]

Glen,

I have a Pentax film SLR, (unused for 4 years), and undestand what you are saying. But it's the preview on the LCD that I would like so that I could compose my picture on a flip up/down LCD at waist level or held above the head. The temporary black out during the actual exposure would not IMHO be too big a price to pay? Would the flip up LCD then stilll be impossible if one was willing to accept the inconvenience of a short black out?

=Roy=

Since digital cameras use the sensor to do the LCD preview, you
would only see the back of the mirror with the SLR.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/camera7.htm

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

--
=Roy=

 

[Sandman]

Roy Ehman,

The only DSLR that can do this is the Olympus E-10 and E-20, two venerable workhorses from the Olympus line-up. I have an E-10 and it is an awesome camera. The only real drawbacks of the Olympus Exx are the noise and no interchangable lenses. Also, due to the sensor size, DOF considerations are much more like Prosumer Digicams than true DSLR's.

And yes, there may be a day when we have a TTL viewfinder AND a live-preview LCD screen. BUt I can honestly tell you, I'll take TTL over an EVF any day. ANd I never used my LCD screen to frame an image, even when I had it on my two previous Olympus Cams.

Cheers,

jim

--
Shoot more, ***** less!
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

 

[Jun2]

They can make a camera without mirror. One is without optical view finder, that is similar to 717 or 828, but larger sensor. Alternatively, using a prism instead of the mirror. The prism can split light into half, half of the light going to view finder the other half going to the sensor (the disadvantage is that will double the exposure). Also prism cost more money.

Jun

From a cost perspective, the SLR mechanism is highly perfected and
almost failsafe from establishd optical camera companies (guess
that excludes Sony), and so is the lens-and-mount system....to say
nothing of optics the 717's and 828's of this world can't match.

Given this choice, I'll take the higher quality of the SLR system
over the convenience of EVF any day. (I AM going to buy my wife an
EVF camera, though.)
--
Wilfred M Rand
http://www.pbase.com/wilfredmrand/

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

 

[Roy Ehman]

Thanks Jim,

I once ordered an E10, didn't like it and sent it back! But I will take another look at the E20. Of course it's that darn noise that drives me to DSLR. I shot 200+ at a wedding Sunday --- all in low light --- and spent the last two days using NI to clean them up. Fortunately I don't mind the loss of detail -- it does wonders for ladies skin!!!

Roy Ehman,

The only DSLR that can do this is the Olympus E-10 and E-20, two
venerable workhorses from the Olympus line-up. I have an E-10 and
it is an awesome camera. The only real drawbacks of the Olympus
Exx are the noise and no interchangable lenses. Also, due to the
sensor size, DOF considerations are much more like Prosumer
Digicams than true DSLR's.

And yes, there may be a day when we have a TTL viewfinder AND a
live-preview LCD screen. BUt I can honestly tell you, I'll take
TTL over an EVF any day. ANd I never used my LCD screen to frame
an image, even when I had it on my two previous Olympus Cams.

Cheers,

jim

--
Shoot more, ***** less!
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

--
=Roy=

 

[Ray Chen]

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

I take a lot of my photos from the low angles, and I just kneel down to get those shots.

LCD is used for review, not for composing in DSLR. I don't think there is a reason why they can't put a big sensor in a camera like the f828, but it currently does not exist.

--
Ray Chen

You Gotta Be In It To Shoot It!

 

[tapir]

Mirror blockout is one reason why you can't compose on LCD with DSLR. But not the only one. The other, and very important one, is how DSLRs AE and why it's much faster and more precise. To meter and focus P&S cams constantly analyze image in digital representation from the sensor only after light was recorded there. Image from sensor is also contantly being shown on LCD while you frame. This whole process is slow and imprecise but allows for LCD framing. On the other hand DSLRs AE/AF work directly thru the lens utilizing optical information. Only when you press the shutter mirror flips up and picture is recorded digitally on the sensor.

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

--
----
http://www.pbase.com/klopus

 

[billybob_jcv]

...there is also a shutter curtain. The DSLR replaces the film with a sensor. The mirror is raised, the shutter curtain provides an opening, and the sensor is "exposed" to the light for the duration of the exposure. It isn't a DSLR without a mirror & a shutter curtain.

I have a Pentax film SLR, (unused for 4 years), and undestand what
you are saying. But it's the preview on the LCD that I would like
so that I could compose my picture on a flip up/down LCD at waist
level or held above the head. The temporary black out during the
actual exposure would not IMHO be too big a price to pay? Would the
flip up LCD then stilll be impossible if one was willing to accept
the inconvenience of a short black out?

=Roy=

Since digital cameras use the sensor to do the LCD preview, you
would only see the back of the mirror with the SLR.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/camera7.htm

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

--
=Roy=

 

[taro233263]

They do have a right angle viewfinder adapter for the 300D if you do a lot of waist/chest held shooting. As for how well you might like it, don't know.

 

[DannyV]

that Oly did not follow up on this idea. Yes the viewfinder was dim, but that seems like it could have been improved with some engineering. I really thought this was a novel way of having the best of both worlds. Wouldn't it have been great if Oly would have been able to implement this with a 2x crop sensor and a little brighter viewfinder? It would have made the E-n line of cameras really stand out from the crowd.

Roy Ehman,

The only DSLR that can do this is the Olympus E-10 and E-20, two
venerable workhorses from the Olympus line-up. I have an E-10 and
it is an awesome camera. The only real drawbacks of the Olympus
Exx are the noise and no interchangable lenses. Also, due to the
sensor size, DOF considerations are much more like Prosumer
Digicams than true DSLR's.

And yes, there may be a day when we have a TTL viewfinder AND a
live-preview LCD screen. BUt I can honestly tell you, I'll take
TTL over an EVF any day. ANd I never used my LCD screen to frame
an image, even when I had it on my two previous Olympus Cams.

Cheers,

jim

--
Shoot more, ***** less!
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
300D tips http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html

 

[kok]

I don't think E-10 and E-20 is DSLR, their lenses are not exchangable. they are just another prosumer digital camera.

i think one should develop another system between DSLR and prosumer, ie. exchangable lenses with current SLR lenses, but without mirrorr, physical shutter, thus the light come from the lense can directly to the sensor, so that the LCD can display the "live" image from the lense. with an adjustable LCD, so we can take picture with the camera on you waist.

Roy Ehman,

The only DSLR that can do this is the Olympus E-10 and E-20, two
venerable workhorses from the Olympus line-up. I have an E-10 and
it is an awesome camera. The only real drawbacks of the Olympus
Exx are the noise and no interchangable lenses. Also, due to the
sensor size, DOF considerations are much more like Prosumer
Digicams than true DSLR's.

And yes, there may be a day when we have a TTL viewfinder AND a
live-preview LCD screen. BUt I can honestly tell you, I'll take
TTL over an EVF any day. ANd I never used my LCD screen to frame
an image, even when I had it on my two previous Olympus Cams.

Cheers,

jim

--
Shoot more, ***** less!
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

 

[csimmons]

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

You know, I also don't know why it couldn't just be a mode of an otherwise dslr camera. I think the first company to do it will get additional converts from the point and shoot realms - especially since it would open up the possibility of movies on an slr - think of the movies you could get with the new D1's performance and a decent L lens.

All you would need to do is the equivalent of mirror lockup, and open the shutter curtain. The sensor would then see through the lens unobstructed just as with an EVF camera (you may want a secondary clear barrier to protect the sensor from dust). Then, whenever you switch the camera to EVF or movie mode, it locks the mirror and opens the shutter curtain to let the light onto the sensor and meters as per an EVF camera. When you switch back to SLR mode, the mirror slaps down and the shutter operates as per normal.

We should run with the idea, what do you think? You and me as ideas men, and Wasia to write the software Cancel that I guess, Wasia won't charge for his work, and no matter what percentage of $0 you take, it's still $0!

It could work though, I'm sure of it (well fairly sure anyway...)

Craig.

 

[kok]

ya i agree with your ideal, i am thinking of the similar thing these few days, but never come cross to fliping the mirrors and open shutter to get "EVF" and movie mode yet.

one drawback from your ideal is, the mirror and shutter both built mechanically, ie. combination of springs and other mechanic stuffs. Thus if mirror flip up and shutter open for a long time, it will do some physical harm to them, thus it is not quite practial IMO.

see my above post for my suggestion.

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

You know, I also don't know why it couldn't just be a mode of an
otherwise dslr camera. I think the first company to do it will get
additional converts from the point and shoot realms - especially
since it would open up the possibility of movies on an slr - think
of the movies you could get with the new D1's performance and a
decent L lens.

All you would need to do is the equivalent of mirror lockup, and
open the shutter curtain. The sensor would then see through the
lens unobstructed just as with an EVF camera (you may want a
secondary clear barrier to protect the sensor from dust). Then,
whenever you switch the camera to EVF or movie mode, it locks the
mirror and opens the shutter curtain to let the light onto the
sensor and meters as per an EVF camera. When you switch back to
SLR mode, the mirror slaps down and the shutter operates as per
normal.

We should run with the idea, what do you think? You and me as
ideas men, and Wasia to write the software Cancel that I guess,
Wasia won't charge for his work, and no matter what percentage of
$0 you take, it's still $0!

It could work though, I'm sure of it (well fairly sure anyway...)

Craig.

 

[DRG]

You know, I also don't know why it couldn't just be a mode of an
otherwise dslr camera. I think the first company to do it will get
additional converts from the point and shoot realms - especially
since it would open up the possibility of movies on an slr - think
of the movies you could get with the new D1's performance and a
decent L lens.

All you would need to do is the equivalent of mirror lockup, and
open the shutter curtain. The sensor would then see through the
lens unobstructed just as with an EVF camera (you may want a
secondary clear barrier to protect the sensor from dust).

The reason for lack of live preview is not the presence of the mirror and shutter per se, since, as you mention, they could easily be opened during this mode. There would need to be a partially reflecting mirror in the optical path to send some light to the metering and AF sensors, however, which would degrade the image quality somewhat. More importantly, this would also require a sensor capable of outputting a subsampled, low-res image at 15fps (preferably 30+). Creating this flexibility means building additional data routing on the sensor chip. These signal lines consume area. The result is a tradeoff between the area of the sensor consumed by optically-active area (pixels) vs. dead area (signal lines or interconnects). Since DSLRs are associated with high image quality, manufacturers have thus far chosen to optimize for pixel area rather than to build in a rapid frame rate mode.

Even if you could lock up the mirror, open the shutter and get a rapid frame rate, low-res image out of the sensor suitable for sending to an LCD, there's another concern to address. Such a mode would expose the sensor to the environment of the camera body for periods of time that are orders of magnitude larger than for normal DSLR operation. This means a major dust problem unless you give up interchangeable lenses and seal the body up tightly.

David

 

[wilfredmrand]

Yes, I'd be worried about splitting the light because it robs the sensor of much-needed photons. Once batteries and EVF's have evolved to the point they can run for hours and hours on a single charge, we'll see them creep in. They also have to solve the time delay.

Jun

From a cost perspective, the SLR mechanism is highly perfected and
almost failsafe from establishd optical camera companies (guess
that excludes Sony), and so is the lens-and-mount system....to say
nothing of optics the 717's and 828's of this world can't match.

Given this choice, I'll take the higher quality of the SLR system
over the convenience of EVF any day. (I AM going to buy my wife an
EVF camera, though.)
--
Wilfred M Rand
http://www.pbase.com/wilfredmrand/

I find that I take nearly half my pcitures from waist level using
the twist features of the cameras. (f717 & f 828). I would go for a
DSLR in a hearbeat, (and get rid of the darn noise), if one would
have an adjustable LCD. Is there some physical reason why this is
not possible or are the DSLR manufacturers simply bound by
tradition?

=Roy=

--
Wilfred M Rand
http://www.pbase.com/wilfredmrand/

 

[terryfn]

I also can use something to help me compose for a VERY low angle.. Something that I can do easily with my old trusty G2 and its vari-angle LCD.. I don't think I need the real live preview (exposure, DOF) like digicams.. Just to see through viewfinder without put my eye against the rubber.. I don't know, maybe a small video camera (like surveillance cams) attached to the viewfinder and feed the LCD with what it sees.. Just need 100% viewfinder coverage & enough resolution to confirm AF.. and the LCD should be variangle.. and the setup should be attach\detachable easily on my DRebel!
What do you think?

 

[haydnw]

Isn't there also the issue of the sensor being constantly on to feed an LCD screen, and therefore heating up and producing more noise? Thus bringing you right back to one of the factors you wanted avoid by getting a dSLR! Correct me if I'm wrong though...

 

[Sandman]

kok,

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_pressDetails.asp?pressNo=100

Also Phil Askey, January, 2001:

The E-10 is Olympus's foray into the professional digital SLR market, it's also priced to tap into the lucrative prosumer market where owners demand the best quality and features. Looking a little like Sony's DSC-D700 the E-10 has a fixed 4x optical zoom lens (with real mechanical zoom and fly-by-wire focusing), a true TTL viewfinder which gets its image from a beam splitting prism placed between the lens and CCD. The 4 megapixel CCD makes the E-10 the first true 4 megapixel digital camera available.

And here is how they do it:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse10/

Just so you know~

Cheers,

jim

--
Shoot more, ***** less!
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3