Reading mode: Light Dark

DSLR with flip up LCD

Go to last post
Canom produced this camera in 1965 and for what
I remember was a total disaster in sales.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/1955-1969/data/1965_prx.html

Bruno
pbleic said:
My post from below:

The Oly E-10 (of which I am a proud owner) looks, feels, and acts
like an SLR camera with a fixed lens. Nobody said SLRs have to have
exchangeable lenses. Nor do reflex mirrors need to retract. In
fact, the mirror in the E-10 has a specific name: A Pellicle
Mirror. See this definition from photonotes.org:

Pellicle mirror.

Also “fixed reflex mirror.” An SLR reflex mirror which is partially
transparent and does not move.

One of the advantages of traditional moving-mirror SLR cameras is
that the photographer can look through the viewfinder and see what
the actual taking lens is seeing. The primary disadvantage is
mirror blackout - when the mirror has flipped up to expose the film
then nothing can be seen through the viewfinder. Mirror blackout,
though brief at high shutter speeds, can nonetheless be a problem
for sports and other action photography.

Cameras with pellicle mirrors have fixed half-silvered mirrors that
both direct light to the viewfinder and to the film surface. They
therefore eliminate mirror blackout whilst preserving the
advantages of an SLR. They are also much quieter, as there are no
mirror slap sounds or blur-inducing vibrations caused by mirror
motion. Pellicle mirror cameras can also shoot almost instantly -
unlike most SLRs there’s no lag time resulting from having to move
the mirror out of the way. This rapid-fire capability also permits
faster film transport mechanisms in some cases.

Pellicle mirror cameras have two drawbacks. First, the mirror must
be kept scrupulously clean because light passes through it to the
film surface. Second, because some of the light is being diverted
up to the viewfinder there’s less light available to the film.
Pellicle mirrors typically cost 2/3 stop of light and the
viewfinder is also a bit dimmer.

A pellicle is a membrane or a thin film and refers in this case to
the very thin reflective coating on the mirror.

cf. lag time, mirror, mirror blackout, mirror lockup, mirror slap,
reflex mirror, single lens reflex (SLR).

Entry last updated 2002-04-16. Term 879 of 1472.
--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------
Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004
All rights reserved.
Click to expand...
 
Sandman said:
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
Click to expand...
I used to have an Exakta Varex, which had a removable pentaprism which meant you could use it at waist level - if you had very good eyesight!

TonySD
 
Point one - I need to get even lower for some flower shots.

Point two - at 70+, my knees!
Ray Chen said:
Roy Ehman said:
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?
Click to expand...
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!
Click to expand...
--
TonySD
 
Roy Ehman said:
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=
Click to expand...
With a true DSLR you only have access to the live image through the combination of the mirror and the pentaprism and veiwfinder opening, optically, in other words. The LCD has no function but playback. It is nothing but an exposed image viewer. There is no possibility of a live image. It is a mechanical constraint that can't be overcome with an SLR design.

If you want an LCD viewer you will have to go with one of those pretend DSLR's like the Canon Pro or Nikon, Minolta, and Fuji and other equivalents.
--
Dave Lewis
 
terryfn said:
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.
Click to expand...
One way to preserve the benefits of a DSLR and to add live preview would be to create an integrated version of what you describe. Since some light is already being deflected away from the lens -> viewfinder path to feed the AF and exposure sensors, another bit of light could also be directed to a dedicated, lower-res CCD for feeding to a live preview LCD. Or, such a sensor could be made to slide in or out of the viewfinder optical path depending on which composition method the photographer prefers. It would add more complexity, bulk and cost but is certainly possible. Basically, no manufacturer has deemed it worth it ... yet.

David
 
The Olympus E-10/E-20 is a "true" SLR, and has this very feature. It is an example of a pellicle camera (see my posts above), much like some earlier EOS cameras. It certainly has some advantages and disadvantages. However, live LCD and digital SLR can go together.

--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------

Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004 All rights reserved.
 
Another huge advantage is in studio work - you can seel if the flash has fired! I still keep my E20 as a spare, although it does not compare with the 300d in picture quality, although overall it is a much more professional camera.
--
Bill.
 
Every time I pick my old E-10 up, I long for the feel of quality and solidity. However, then I see the maximum aperture speed, the ISO 320 max with noise, etc.

Yesterday, though, I picked up a 10D in a store and wished I had bought it, instead of the 300D. Hopefully within a year a new one will be available.
Bill McKelvie said:
Another huge advantage is in studio work - you can seel if the
flash has fired! I still keep my E20 as a spare, although it does
not compare with the 300d in picture quality, although overall it
is a much more professional camera.
--
Bill.
Click to expand...
--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------

Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004 All rights reserved.
 
pbleic said:
The Olympus E-10/E-20 is a "true" SLR, and has this very feature.
It is an example of a pellicle camera (see my posts above), much
like some earlier EOS cameras. It certainly has some advantages
and disadvantages. However, live LCD and digital SLR can go
together.

--
Paul
Click to expand...
Also, there is no reason why a "flipping pellicle" cannot be designed - one which acts like a pellicle during preview but flips up to divert all the light to the sensor during exposure.

--
Bill.
 
Tony SD said:
I used to have an Exakta Varex, which had a removable pentaprism
which meant you could use it at waist level - if you had very good
eyesight!

TonySD
Click to expand...
So did my old Edixa, and also early Nikon models. Some of these had hoods and magnifiers for viewing, if you could cope with the reversed image (just like a Rollei!)

--
Bill.
 
Bill: Okay...It's a "DSLFDPBS" (Fixed Double-Prism Beam Splitter) camera and you are right, the focusing is done using the "upward reflected" light

from the Prism Beam Splitter which explains the extremely poor Low-Light focusing capability of the E-10/E-20. The old "Pellicle Mirror" system that Canon used had it's purpose at the time...getting fast frame-rates (10fps) from a camera at the time that technology didn't have a better way.

I don't ever see putting something in the light path that obstructs the imager a viable solution. Just my 2cents...
GaryM
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-
Bill McKelvie said:
I think you're confusing the E20 with another camera.
The viewing on a E20 is via a mirror and pentaprism. The only
difference is that the mirror is fixed - just like some Canon filn
SLRs.
The focussing is not done by the sensor but by the same kind of
mechanism as the 300E. It is every bit as much of an SLR as is the
300d.

--
Bill.
Click to expand...
 
GaryM said:
Bill: Okay...It's a "DSLFDPBS" (Fixed Double-Prism Beam Splitter)
camera and you are right, the focusing is done using the "upward
reflected" light
from the Prism Beam Splitter which explains the extremely poor
Low-Light focusing capability of the E-10/E-20. The old "Pellicle
Mirror" system that Canon used had it's purpose at the
time...getting fast frame-rates (10fps) from a camera at the time
that technology didn't have a better way.
I don't ever see putting something in the light path that obstructs
the imager a viable solution. Just my 2cents...
Click to expand...
See my post further down - a "flipping pellicle" would be a possible solution, i.e. a half silvered mirror which split the light between the chip and virefider during preview, but which flipped up like a conventional SLR during exposure.
--
Bill.
 
Ray,

I'm 78!!! Doing a quick "kneel down" in front of a 200 people in a church to catch the flower girl coming down the isle is not an option for me! :-)

Also kneeling or squatting or crouching at a formal gathering where everyone is eating would be ludicrous. People are very comfortable when I stand next to a table but photograph from the waist and the pictures look right from that level.

=Roy=
Ray Chen said:
Roy Ehman said:
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?
Click to expand...
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!
Click to expand...
--
=Roy=
 
taro

Could you give me a URL --- how would I search for this item? Chest high might be good. I think I saw a camera recently that had a view finder that turns up but cant remember if it was DSLR or a prosumer camera

=Roy=
taro said:
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.
Click to expand...
--
=Roy=
 
-rajkumar

Could you please point me to where I could find this device. I think this woudl be just enough to get me into a DSLR but which one, D300 or D10?

=Roy=
babu said:
I guess people have already answered. But if still you would like
to shoot by keeping the camera on the floor, there is a bevel lense
avaible that fits into your viewfinder. And it can be turned to 90
degree up.

-rajkumar
Roy Ehman said:
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=
Click to expand...
--
rajkumar
Click to expand...
--
=Roy=
 
Dave,

If these cameras you mention have a nosie performance approaching the D300 could you please give me a few model numbers to look at. Thanks a lot.

I lvoe the funcionality of the F828 but the noise is killing me. All my work is low light and people.

=Roy=
Dave Lewis said:
Roy Ehman said:
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=
Click to expand...
With a true DSLR you only have access to the live image through the
combination of the mirror and the pentaprism and veiwfinder
opening, optically, in other words. The LCD has no function but
playback. It is nothing but an exposed image viewer. There is no
possibility of a live image. It is a mechanical constraint that
can't be overcome with an SLR design.

If you want an LCD viewer you will have to go with one of those
pretend DSLR's like the Canon Pro or Nikon, Minolta, and Fuji and
other equivalents.
--
Dave Lewis
Click to expand...
--
=Roy=
 
Bill McKelvie said:
George Eliott said:
Bill McKelvie said:
On the contrary, a permanent half silverd mirror would permanently
seal it from dust and fix an existing problem!

--

Bill.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Canon actually do this with one of their film cameras, one of the
Eos 1 series, to enable short shuttrer lag times and high motor
drive spees for sports photography - they have the technology!
--
Bill.
Click to expand...
image quality having yet another piece of glass between my expensive lens and sensor. There is allready the Alias filter infront of the sensor( is that how you spell it). I'm not willing to trade image quality even a little bit for convenience of low angle shots, i'll just get down on the ground.
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 
pbleic said:
The Oly E-10 (of which I am a proud owner) looks, feels, and acts
like an SLR camera with a fixed lens. Nobody said SLRs have to
have exchangeable lenses. Nor do reflex mirrors need to retract.
In fact, the mirror in the E-10 has a specific name: A Pellicle
Mirror. See this definition from photonotes.org:

Pellicle mirror.

Also “fixed reflex mirror.” An SLR reflex mirror which is partially
transparent and does not move.
Click to expand...
Isn't the rebel's mirror partially transparent? I mean i can see through it to the focusing mirror at a certain angle. Maybe i am seeing things.
pbleic said:
One of the advantages of traditional moving-mirror SLR cameras is
that the photographer can look through the viewfinder and see what
the actual taking lens is seeing. The primary disadvantage is
mirror blackout - when the mirror has flipped up to expose the film
then nothing can be seen through the viewfinder. Mirror blackout,
though brief at high shutter speeds, can nonetheless be a problem
for sports and other action photography.

Cameras with pellicle mirrors have fixed half-silvered mirrors that
both direct light to the viewfinder and to the film surface. They
therefore eliminate mirror blackout whilst preserving the
advantages of an SLR. They are also much quieter, as there are no
mirror slap sounds or blur-inducing vibrations caused by mirror
motion. Pellicle mirror cameras can also shoot almost instantly -
unlike most SLRs there’s no lag time resulting from having to move
the mirror out of the way. This rapid-fire capability also permits
faster film transport mechanisms in some cases.

Pellicle mirror cameras have two drawbacks. First, the mirror must
be kept scrupulously clean because light passes through it to the
film surface. Second, because some of the light is being diverted
up to the viewfinder there’s less light available to the film.
Pellicle mirrors typically cost 2/3 stop of light and the
viewfinder is also a bit dimmer.

A pellicle is a membrane or a thin film and refers in this case to
the very thin reflective coating on the mirror.

cf. lag time, mirror, mirror blackout, mirror lockup, mirror slap,
reflex mirror, single lens reflex (SLR).

Entry last updated 2002-04-16. Term 879 of 1472.

--
Paul

------------------------------------------------
Pbase supporter
Photographs at: http://www.pbase.com/pbleic
--------------------------------------------------
Unless specified otherwise, all images are Copyright 2003, 2004
All rights reserved.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top