I'd like to have an SLT-mirror that flips up during the shot

Started Oct 1, 2012 | Discussions thread
theswede Veteran Member • Posts: 4,009
Re: I'd like to have an SLT-mirror that flips up during the shot

Prognathous wrote:

Weren't you the one who wrote:

"Evidence please. This is a controversial statement which is at odds with present photographic evidence, so you need to back this up. Substantially." ...and "Says the guy making asinine and obliviously stupid statements as if they're the plain truth, without a hint of modesty or appreciation for that engineers spend their whole career on these issues. Yeah, you're one to talk about common courtesy."


Am I the only one that finds this ironic?

Plenty of people find non-ironic things ironic, so I doubt it.

Why would PDAF cease to work when the mirror stays down (in SLT mode)?

It wouldn't. But it would when the mirror slaps out of the way. And since the mirror makes such an earth shattering difference in image quality for the OP, why would he ever allow it to pollute his precious pixels?

The whole point of this thread is to discuss the possibility of an SLR-like mode to complement the SLT solution, not to replace it.

For what purpose? This is yet to be established.

By the way, even if the current SLT mirror is too fragile for quick flipping, there's no reason it can't be lifted up slowly to switch from SLT mode to mirrorless mode (remaining in the up position until the user chooses to switch back to SLT mode).

There are plenty of reasons why this is not worth the considerable expense in R&D as well as in increased cost of manufacture. The one which first comes to mind (apart from the immense frailty of such a contraption) is the loss of accurate placement and susceptibility to vibration such a contraption would suffer.

This option would remove any complaints about the SLT mirror being in the way and "eating" light, but can still offer a very functional camera (with eye-level viewing, CDAF, main-sensor PDAF and of course MF).

And vastly reduced AF repeatability, increased size and weight, increased cost, reduced durability and increased service interval and a host of new image aberrations appearing when the mirror is not perfectly steady and firmly attached.

You clearly think the A77 has a way too low price tag and too good performance.

Thanks, but no thanks.

As an A77 who doesn't shoot a lot of sports or BIF, I would probably use this mode very frequently. For sure sufficiently-fast CDAF is more attractive for my kind of shooting than faster-but-less-accurate PDAF.

CDAF works well with how many Sony lenses? Ok, with how many Minolta lenses? That's what I thought. What would it be good for again, being just about completely unusable with all of your lenses? And forget "sufficiently fast" when using CDAF on a PDAF optimized lense control system.

Getting another half a stop or so for free in that mode is only the icing on the cake.

Something you won't even notice. If it was worth the while to add CDAF to a PDAF optimized lense control system it would be more than a pathetic attempt to rescue live-view on canikon systems.


 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a7 Sony a5000 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow