Canon Clinging to Mirrors Means Opportunity for Sony Cameras

RioRico · 09-20-2011, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by normhead

There have been mirrorless cameras forever... longer than there have been DSLR's. To start claiming they have some kind of potential not shared by DSLR's is just nonsense. ... Even in the film days there were mirrorless cameras. I have a twin lens reflex in my display case. All viefinder cameras are mirrorless. Range finder cameras were mirrorless. Let's not make out that techincal mirrorless solutions are something new...

Just to quibble slightly: the 'reflex' in TLR refers to the fixed (non-flapping) mirror between the viewing lens and the groundglass (or the prism-finder in advanced TLRs). And a rangefinder contains an itsy-bitsy moving RF mirror. The difference with SLRs is the MOVING mirror in the lens-to-frame optical path.

Also, interestingly, reflex (mirror) 'cameras' preceded mirrorless photography. The first photographic recordings were done without mirrors, true; but a common artist's tool was a reflex camera obscura, like the viewing system of a TLR where thin paper was places on the groundglass and the image traced by hand.

The photographic SLR dates back about a century. I forget (and I'm too lazy to look it up) whether 4x5in SLRs were used earlier, but I know they were in use during WWI. But it's true that the vast majority of consumer and professional photographic cameras have NOT contained flapping mirrors. Mirrorless forever!

Chex · 09-20-2011, 08:31 PM

Originally posted by nosnoop

In the near future, when progressive sensors become a reality; and mechanical shutters are gone for good, mirrorless cameras would really be flying - and imagine flash sync speed at 1/4000 or 1/8000....

I would sure hate to have to go through the pics for "the keeper" from 2-3 seconds of burst mode like that! I couldn't ever imagine needing more than 30 FPS.. 60 fps at the max! even at that I think I would be happy enough with say 20-30 fps.

RioRico · 09-20-2011, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Chex

I would sure hate to have to go through the pics for "the keeper" from 2-3 seconds of burst mode like that! I couldn't ever imagine needing more than 30 FPS.. 60 fps at the max! even at that I think I would be happy enough with say 20-30 fps.

I suspect that we'll have new software tools to help us there. An image browser with control parameters -- subject position within the frame, sharpness, contrast, percent of OOF areas, blur, face recognition, that sort of stuff -- would help filter-out the luzers. That's assuming you're using the high FPS rate for spray-and-pray stills shooting. If you're shooting video at such a rate, no problem! Juice-up the slo-mo! And be sure to insert the 1TB memcard. Let's see, at 100 fps with paltry 25mb images, you could get almost 7 minutes of video on that card!

Chex · 09-20-2011, 10:03 PM

I'm guessing there will be a better compression format than jpeg in the near future as well... it will be needed!

johnmflores · 09-20-2011, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by normhead

That's just not right. My K-x takes movies without the mirror flapping around for each frame.... that would be multiple expossures at 25 fps or something... there's nothing about a camera having a mirror that says it has to use the mirror.

You're talking Apples and IBMs. K-x movies are 720p, barely bigger than a megapixel

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sony means business with the new Alpha A65...	Unsinkable II	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	08-25-2011 05:19 AM
K-5 better than both Nikon and Canon Flagship Cameras?	geekette	Pentax DSLR Discussion	38	04-22-2011 04:28 AM
Macro Clinging by a Claw	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	2	09-10-2010 05:29 PM
Wild rumor: Canon and Sony fighting over Pentax?	rawr	Pentax News and Rumors	56	09-05-2010 05:10 PM
SLR - Pentax/Canon/Nikon/Sony (HELP!)	conradcjc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	26	05-03-2010 05:00 PM

09-20-2011, 07:15 AM	#31
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead There have been mirrorless cameras forever... longer than there have been DSLR's. To start claiming they have some kind of potential not shared by DSLR's is just nonsense. ... Even in the film days there were mirrorless cameras. I have a twin lens reflex in my display case. All viefinder cameras are mirrorless. Range finder cameras were mirrorless. Let's not make out that techincal mirrorless solutions are something new... Just to quibble slightly: the 'reflex' in TLR refers to the fixed (non-flapping) mirror between the viewing lens and the groundglass (or the prism-finder in advanced TLRs). And a rangefinder contains an itsy-bitsy moving RF mirror. The difference with SLRs is the MOVING mirror in the lens-to-frame optical path. Also, interestingly, reflex (mirror) 'cameras' preceded mirrorless photography. The first photographic recordings were done without mirrors, true; but a common artist's tool was a reflex camera obscura, like the viewing system of a TLR where thin paper was places on the groundglass and the image traced by hand. The photographic SLR dates back about a century. I forget (and I'm too lazy to look it up) whether 4x5in SLRs were used earlier, but I know they were in use during WWI. But it's true that the vast majority of consumer and professional photographic cameras have NOT contained flapping mirrors. Mirrorless forever!

09-20-2011, 08:31 PM	#32
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	Originally posted by nosnoop In the near future, when progressive sensors become a reality; and mechanical shutters are gone for good, mirrorless cameras would really be flying - and imagine flash sync speed at 1/4000 or 1/8000.... I would sure hate to have to go through the pics for "the keeper" from 2-3 seconds of burst mode like that! I couldn't ever imagine needing more than 30 FPS.. 60 fps at the max! even at that I think I would be happy enough with say 20-30 fps.

09-20-2011, 09:16 PM	#33
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263 Original Poster	Originally posted by Chex I would sure hate to have to go through the pics for "the keeper" from 2-3 seconds of burst mode like that! I couldn't ever imagine needing more than 30 FPS.. 60 fps at the max! even at that I think I would be happy enough with say 20-30 fps. I suspect that we'll have new software tools to help us there. An image browser with control parameters -- subject position within the frame, sharpness, contrast, percent of OOF areas, blur, face recognition, that sort of stuff -- would help filter-out the luzers. That's assuming you're using the high FPS rate for spray-and-pray stills shooting. If you're shooting video at such a rate, no problem! Juice-up the slo-mo! And be sure to insert the 1TB memcard. Let's see, at 100 fps with paltry 25mb images, you could get almost 7 minutes of video on that card!

09-20-2011, 10:03 PM	#34
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	I'm guessing there will be a better compression format than jpeg in the near future as well... it will be needed!

09-20-2011, 10:08 PM	#35
johnmflores Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by normhead That's just not right. My K-x takes movies without the mirror flapping around for each frame.... that would be multiple expossures at 25 fps or something... there's nothing about a camera having a mirror that says it has to use the mirror. You're talking Apples and IBMs. K-x movies are 720p, barely bigger than a megapixel

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search