description of camera design I would like to have

I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to have.
Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to include in
this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot camera. But I also
want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold camera up to face instead
of out at arms length).

So I have this idea.

Remove the flip up mirror of a digital SLR. Replace the focusing screen with
an LCD display. Keep the pentaprism and eyepiece from the SLR, but now it is
focusing on the LCD display instead of the SLR's focusing screen. The logic
in the camera can insert information over this display much like a P&S camera
does.

Create a new lens mount similar to the SLR lenses of the same manufacturer.
Shorten the distance between the lens mount to the sensor plane. This can be
done since the SLR mirror is gone. This shorter distance will allow better
and/or less expensive optics for normal and wide angle lenses, especially
with an APS-C sized sensor frame. An adapter can mount into this new mount,
and host a regular SLR lens by extending the mount distance out to where an
SLR lens would mount. This will allow using the SLR lens line with this
camera design.

Focusing would be primarily done with a combination of infrared rangefinding
and detection of sharpness at programmable points in the sensor frame.

Taking the picture could be done one of two ways. One is to simply capture
a scene from the live sensor. It would also be possible to use a focal plane
shutter just like an SLR (close the shutter, clear the sensor, open the
shutter, close the shutter, save the sensor, then switch back to live view).

This would not be an SLR. But it could complement an SLR system for some
types of photography, especially wide angle where the closer lens to sensor
plane distance would make it easier to produce distortion free wide angle
lenses with proper color corrections. It should be modeled and marketed as
a complement camera to the SLR products. A low end entry version could also
be used as an easy step between P&S consumers moving slowly up to SLR.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

wrote in message
...
I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to have.
Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to include in
this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot camera. But I
also
want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold camera up to face instead
of out at arms length).

So I have this idea.

Google for Panasonic G1

wrote:
I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to
have.
Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to
include in this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot
camera. But I also want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold
camera up to face instead of out at arms length).

Phil, any with an electronic viewfinder (EVF) matches this requirement.
There are dozens to choose from

Otherwise, as MG mentioned :
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08...nic_DMC_G1.asp

which uses the new Micro Four Thirds standard for compact cameras with
interchangeable lenses.

David

wrote:
I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to have.
snip

Your description pretty closely matches the Micro-FourThirds standard
announced by the FourThirds group a few months ago, except that it uses
a FourThirds sized sensor instead of your wished for APS-c.
There are two Micro-FourThirds cameras that that will be released
shortly: one is the much described Panasonic DMC-G1 and the other is as
yet un-named Olympus mock-up shown at Photokina.
The only real differences between your wish and the DMC-G1 is that there
is no pentaprism (what's that needed for? An eyepiece pointed straight
at the EVF screen does the same thing, without requiring a chunk of
expensive, machined glass.) and it seems to use contrast detection AF
only (with no IR RF mechanism).

On 28 Sep 2008 03:44:42 GMT, wrote:

I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to have.
Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to include in
this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot camera. But I also
want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold camera up to face instead
of out at arms length).

So I have this idea.

Remove the flip up mirror of a digital SLR. Replace the focusing screen with
an LCD display. Keep the pentaprism and eyepiece from the SLR, but now it is
focusing on the LCD display instead of the SLR's focusing screen. The logic
in the camera can insert information over this display much like a P&S camera
does.

It's depressing the number of times I have had to say this recently -
This is a feature of the now obsolete Sony F707.

Create a new lens mount similar to the SLR lenses of the same manufacturer.
Shorten the distance between the lens mount to the sensor plane. This can be
done since the SLR mirror is gone. This shorter distance will allow better
and/or less expensive optics for normal and wide angle lenses, especially
with an APS-C sized sensor frame. An adapter can mount into this new mount,
and host a regular SLR lens by extending the mount distance out to where an
SLR lens would mount. This will allow using the SLR lens line with this
camera design.

Focusing would be primarily done with a combination of infrared rangefinding
and detection of sharpness at programmable points in the sensor frame.

Taking the picture could be done one of two ways. One is to simply capture
a scene from the live sensor. It would also be possible to use a focal plane
shutter just like an SLR (close the shutter, clear the sensor, open the
shutter, close the shutter, save the sensor, then switch back to live view).

This would not be an SLR. But it could complement an SLR system for some
types of photography, especially wide angle where the closer lens to sensor
plane distance would make it easier to produce distortion free wide angle
lenses with proper color corrections. It should be modeled and marketed as
a complement camera to the SLR products. A low end entry version could also
be used as an easy step between P&S consumers moving slowly up to SLR.



Eric Stevens

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 05:54:03 GMT David J Taylor wrote:
| wrote:
| I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to
| have.
| Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to
| include in this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot
| camera. But I also want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold
| camera up to face instead of out at arms length).
|
| Phil, any with an electronic viewfinder (EVF) matches this requirement.
| There are dozens to choose from
|
| Otherwise, as MG mentioned :
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08...nic_DMC_G1.asp
|
| which uses the new Micro Four Thirds standard for compact cameras with
| interchangeable lenses.

Looks pretty much like what I want. Now I hope other manufacturers like
Canon and Nikon come along with the same concept.

This is still very new. So new B&H doesn't even have a price or date, yet.

Specs say it has a 1920x1080 resolution, but no video recording capability.
I know most SLRs don't have the video mode. But that would be a nice add-on
for special circumstances. Consumer video cameras are lousy and ENG cameras
are expensive. This capability in an SLR form factor would be an improvement
over consumer video cameras at a reasonable price, especially if they can do
HD.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 05:54:03 GMT David J Taylor wrote:
| wrote:
| I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to
| have.
| Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to
| include in this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot
| camera. But I also want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold
| camera up to face instead of out at arms length).
|
| Phil, any with an electronic viewfinder (EVF) matches this requirement.
| There are dozens to choose from
|
| Otherwise, as MG mentioned :
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08...nic_DMC_G1.asp
|
| which uses the new Micro Four Thirds standard for compact cameras with
| interchangeable lenses.

I just noticed that the "four thirds" system is a 2x factor focal length,
compared to the APS-C which is 1.6x. I would consider the APS-C size the
smallest I could go for. I'd rather have full-frame but I know those are
expensive sensors.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

wrote:
[]
I just noticed that the "four thirds" system is a 2x factor focal
length,
compared to the APS-C which is 1.6x. I would consider the APS-C size
the
smallest I could go for. I'd rather have full-frame but I know those
are
expensive sensors.

Some people say that the noise in 4/3 sensors isn't a lot greater than
that in APS-C, but I feel the jury is still out. Might be interesting to
see what Canon, Fuji, Nikon or Sony could do in 4/3-size sensors, but I
think they are committed to their present mounts, at least at the moment.

Full-frame will likely not be as small and light....

David

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 03:44:42 +0000, phil-news-nospam wrote:

I have thought about the design of a digital camera I would like to
have. Two existing camera designs have some features I would like to
include in this design. I like the live view of a point-and-shoot
camera. But I also want the viewfinder style of an SLR camera (hold
camera up to face instead of out at arms length).

So I have this idea.

Remove the flip up mirror of a digital SLR. Replace the focusing screen
with an LCD display. Keep the pentaprism and eyepiece from the SLR, but
now it is focusing on the LCD display instead of the SLR's focusing
screen. The logic in the camera can insert information over this
display much like a P&S camera does.

Create a new lens mount similar to the SLR lenses of the same
manufacturer. Shorten the distance between the lens mount to the sensor
plane. This can be done since the SLR mirror is gone. This shorter
distance will allow better and/or less expensive optics for normal and
wide angle lenses, especially with an APS-C sized sensor frame. An
adapter can mount into this new mount, and host a regular SLR lens by
extending the mount distance out to where an SLR lens would mount. This
will allow using the SLR lens line with this camera design.

Focusing would be primarily done with a combination of infrared
rangefinding and detection of sharpness at programmable points in the
sensor frame.

Taking the picture could be done one of two ways. One is to simply
capture a scene from the live sensor. It would also be possible to use
a focal plane shutter just like an SLR (close the shutter, clear the
sensor, open the shutter, close the shutter, save the sensor, then
switch back to live view).

This would not be an SLR. But it could complement an SLR system for
some types of photography, especially wide angle where the closer lens
to sensor plane distance would make it easier to produce distortion free
wide angle lenses with proper color corrections. It should be modeled
and marketed as a complement camera to the SLR products. A low end
entry version could also be used as an easy step between P&S consumers
moving slowly up to SLR.

You haven't been keeping up. The latest Canon dslr's have live view; from
memory the eos 450D - Eos 40D Eos 1ds Mk111 and the soon to be released
Eos 50D and Eos 5d Mk 11

--
Neil
reverse ra and delete l
Linux user 335851

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 09:59:58 GMT David J Taylor wrote:
| wrote:
| []
| I just noticed that the "four thirds" system is a 2x factor focal
| length,
| compared to the APS-C which is 1.6x. I would consider the APS-C size
| the
| smallest I could go for. I'd rather have full-frame but I know those
| are
| expensive sensors.
|
| Some people say that the noise in 4/3 sensors isn't a lot greater than
| that in APS-C, but I feel the jury is still out. Might be interesting to
| see what Canon, Fuji, Nikon or Sony could do in 4/3-size sensors, but I
| think they are committed to their present mounts, at least at the moment.

Since Canon and Nikon has SLR lines for APS-C and full frame, it would make
no sense for them to offer a camera of this type in any other sensor size.
The APS-C size would be appropriate for the entry level model. If there is
any need for a high end professional model, that one could be full frame.


| Full-frame will likely not be as small and light....

Of course. But not everyone needs them this small and light. I have a 450D
and it's actually smaller and lighter than I would like. Of course it depends
on the person. People who have only done P&S would find the 450D to be big
and heavy. I used to carry around film based FE-2 and FM-2 equipped with motor
drives and large lenses (135mm f/2.0 and 100-300 f/5.6) and that was not any
difficulty for me, even with the pack containing 4 more lenses and extra film.

I'm looking at getting a battery holder/grip and more batteries just to add
some "ballast" to the camera. Eventually, I'll move up to a 50D or 5Dm2 if
I stay with Canon (the 450D was purchased to try out Canon for my move to
digital).

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |