Imagine a DSLR with MLU & life preview.....

....Why?

1) MLU is only necessary for longer exposure shots.
No. It's mostly necessary in a "critical range", approximatly from 1/30 sec to 1 sec (it varies depending on camera and lens). Longer (as Jay pointed out) and the portion of the exposure "contaminated" by vibration is pretty small.
2) Longer-exposure shots needs pre-composition, which means, before
pressing the shutter, you already know what your subject is.
Again, typically not in a wildlife situation. You focus on mama tiger and the cubs. Then you wait, patiently, for the next hour for all four cubs to be looking in the same direction at the same time.
3) You don't have to see and watch the subject being shot (thru the
camera) during long exposures. Why would you need to?
See my response to number 2, above.

There's a reason that professionals consider MLU essential on pro cameras.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
...still be 'fragile, suffer from rot etc?'
SNIP

I've used a pellicle mirror camera. They're fragile, they suffer
mirror rot, they're so hard to clean that they make sensor cleaning
look like a snap, and they cause vertical image smear, even with
the pellicle is only a few microns thick.

SNIP

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
As you said here, in your kind response to my question about AF in
EVF only cameras:
'First, pop up a semi-transparent mirror for AF. It doesn't have to
cover the entire sensor, so it can be smaller, lighter (therefore
lower mass and less vibration) than a full SLR mirror. And it can
be closer to the sensor, to not eat up so much back focus.'

This sounds as though the same probs as with pellicle mirrors might
apply.

I'm not trying to be difficult, just interested in what you are saying
My observations on the small pop up mirror were based on personal
experiences with pellicle mirror cameras.

Canon made two autofocus pellicle mirror cameras. The EOS RT (an
EOS 630 varient) and the EOS-1n RS (an EOS 1, surprisingly) had
pop up mirrors for the AF sensor. The RT had a single, central
sensor that didn't make much demand of the mirror. The RT had
multiple sensors, but its mirror was still 1/3 the size (1/9 the
area) of a normal mirror, and with a shorter arc. Overall, you're
talking 1/8 the moment of inertia, so proportionally less
vibration. Instead of being suspended from two pivot points at the
sides of the mirror box, it comes up from the bottom, on a shaft
like a little fly swatter.

These are real "cult cameras" these days. I repaired an RS recently
for a wedding photographer, who absolutly loves seeing the flash go
off through the viewfinder. He said the flash image "burns" itself
into your retina, you get a couple od seconds of "review", sort of
like using a DSLR.

The wild thing is that I was trying to find some good pictures of
the mechanism and I came across three different reviews that
claimed the lack of mirror slap substantially improved hand holding
shutter speeds, giving them a stop of advantage. I think it may
have been a placebo effect, but that's the cool thing about hand
holding a camera: it's neuromuscular, so placebos work!



--
Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post
something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
...still be 'fragile, suffer from rot etc?'
It would be a moving, first surface, semitransparent mirror, like the main mirror of an existing SLR, or like the secondary AF mirror. It wouln't be a pellicle.

Remember, this little AF mirror ducks out of the way when you shoot, so it only has to be good enough for the AF system. The big problem facing the pellicle mirror was that it is always in the optical path, so it has to be good enough for shooting through, in addition to serving less demanding tasks like AF or viewing.

In order to minimize smear (close spaced ghosts from reflections between the first and second surfaces of the mirror) pellicle mirrors have to be very thin, just a few microns (thousandths of a mm). That's what makes them fragile: thin and big, a bad combination, like a glass soap bubble.

AF mirrors are small, and first surface (the second surface doesn't receive light, so no internal reflections) so they can be thicker.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Since both Sony and Panasonic are said to be working on cameras with interchangeable lenses and EVF's, I wonder if we can hope to see that in the the first iteration?
...still be 'fragile, suffer from rot etc?'
It would be a moving, first surface, semitransparent mirror, like
the main mirror of an existing SLR, or like the secondary AF
mirror. It wouln't be a pellicle.

Remember, this little AF mirror ducks out of the way when you
shoot, so it only has to be good enough for the AF system. The big
problem facing the pellicle mirror was that it is always in the
optical path, so it has to be good enough for shooting through, in
addition to serving less demanding tasks like AF or viewing.

In order to minimize smear (close spaced ghosts from reflections
between the first and second surfaces of the mirror) pellicle
mirrors have to be very thin, just a few microns (thousandths of a
mm). That's what makes them fragile: thin and big, a bad
combination, like a glass soap bubble.

AF mirrors are small, and first surface (the second surface doesn't
receive light, so no internal reflections) so they can be thicker.

--
Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post
something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
With the mirror up the viewfinder goes black.
Ok? but not like I'm missing much in the split second when the shutter goes. If its a long exposure on a tripod then I have no intention of shoving my face into the viewdinder to look at the scene while the shutter is open.

If the shutter is open Im already looking at the scene with my own eyes anyways.

The only good reason to have a live preview would be for events where you cant see past peoples heads and need to blindly shoot the camera into the crowd. The flip up lcd would be nice in this situation.

http://www.evolver.ca
 
...IS/VR-enabled lenses, or AS-enabled DSLR body (Minolta).
Not even close.

Stabilized lenses don't do much for mirror slap, nor does a stabilized body. We're talking long lenses, on a tripod, doing wildlife. There are two kinds of stabilization systems: those that are smart enough to recognize when a lens is on a tripod and shut themselves down, and those that aren't smart enough to recognize they're on a tripod and make things much worse.

And they don't do anything at all for macro. There are 6 degrees of freedom for a moving camera, translation around 3 different axises, and rotation around those same 3 axises. Stabilization is built for working at portrait distances or greater, when pitch and yaw (two of the three rotations) are the dominant shake effects. At macro ranges, the three translations are the dominant effects, and stabilization again just makes things worse.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall. ;)

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
If you can figure out how to get a camera to give a "life preview" and you'll be an instant billionaire! LOL
 
that was a non-intended pun, mixed up life with live (i am not a native english speaker).
Glad you liked it.

--
Show me an affordable beamer with slide film resolution and I am sold....

Ralf
 
A lor of people like to make pictures that require them to use MLU all the time and they are left with any type of VF for most of their work.

Canon seems to understand this as they put some sort of live preview in the 20Da.

Well those people should be forced to buy a special camera for their use (SLR's are all about versatility) and even change their favourite system if only one manufacturer provides that.

So there should be life preview for MLU users in every DSLR. I don't need it but I can understand that others do. After all in their type of work they end up having no VF at all. And if live preview stays powered down in all the other modes We should no problem with heat or noise.
Take the sensor processing technology that drives the EVF in the
much discussed Sony DSC-R1 and assume that DSLR's will still be
built with OVF's and mirrors in the light path to make use of all
the glass designed for them and their film ancestors, i.e. for the
long distance between last lense element and the sensor (film).

we would get:
  • OVF: delay free, fast AF, ...well, just as now (hopefully
brighter one day...)
  • EVF (on back LCD) in case of Mirror Lock Up after framing the
shot through OVF for timing the final shot

Any thoughts?
--
Show me an affordable beamer with slide film resolution and I am
sold....

Ralf
 
Take the sensor processing technology that drives the EVF in the
much discussed Sony DSC-R1 and assume that DSLR's will still be
built with OVF's and mirrors in the light path to make use of all
the glass designed for them and their film ancestors, i.e. for the
long distance between last lense element and the sensor (film).

we would get:
  • OVF: delay free,
MIRRORS = NOT "delay free", some delay times on SLR are 125 to 175ms ... the shortest SLR I have heard so far is 50ms.

NON-MIRROR can easily be FASTER .... !!! (evidenced by Richol, Epson, and Panasonic PZ30 I think is claiming 10ms)
fast AF, ...well, just as now (hopefully
brighter one day...)
  • EVF (on back LCD) in case of Mirror Lock Up after framing the
shot through OVF for timing the final shot

Any thoughts?
--
Show me an affordable beamer with slide film resolution and I am
sold....

Ralf
--
Thanks for reading .... JoePhoto

( Do You Ever STOP to THINK --- and FORGET to START Again ??? )
 
MIRRORS = NOT "delay free", some delay times on SLR are 125 to
175ms ... the shortest SLR I have heard so far is 50ms.

NON-MIRROR can easily be FASTER .... !!! (evidenced by Richol,
Epson, and Panasonic PZ30 I think is claiming 10ms)
Right. Sony and a few others are right at 10ms when autofocus is bypassed as well. The Nikon D2x is 44ms and the D2h is 45ms. Slightly faster than your 50ms, but slower than the fastest cameras with no moving mirrors.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
 
MIRRORS = NOT "delay free", some delay times on SLR are 125 to
175ms ... the shortest SLR I have heard so far is 50ms.
Hmmmm ... I don't think that anyone believes that DSLR with mirrors are "delay free". EVF cameras can of course be faster. Thats a real advantage (at least for pros) if you also could read the sensor faster and write to memory faster. How about a 100 FPS camera?

Are you mixing it up with that the OVF finder is delay free? (Not 100% true that either - but for all practical purposes it is delay free - speed of light being what it is.)

Roland
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top