A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Medium Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Latest model of Canon cameras



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 13th 07, 11:21 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
Lobby Dosser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 112
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article
, werdan
wrote:

I wonder why Canon doesn't make use of the pellicle mirror technology
in their DSLRs that
they used in the EOS RT.


Because it didn't work well in film days?


Why?
  #12  
Old October 14th 07, 12:45 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,alt.photography
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 143
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

Lobby Dosser wrote:

Randall Ainsworth wrote:


In article
, werdan
wrote:


I wonder why Canon doesn't make use of the pellicle mirror technology
in their DSLRs that
they used in the EOS RT.


Because it didn't work well in film days?



Why?


Read the other posts doppy
  #13  
Old October 14th 07, 01:39 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,alt.photography
Lobby Dosser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 112
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

Rob wrote:

Lobby Dosser wrote:

Randall Ainsworth wrote:


In article
,
werdan wrote:


I wonder why Canon doesn't make use of the pellicle mirror
technology in their DSLRs that
they used in the EOS RT.

Because it didn't work well in film days?



Why?


Read the other posts doppy


I'm coming in late and asked a civil question. No need for rudeness.
Simply ignore the question if you are unwilling or unable to answer it.
  #14  
Old October 14th 07, 01:54 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
werdan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Latest model of Canon cameras


"Lobby Dosser" wrote in message
newsxbQi.2844$I22.1733@trndny03...
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article
, werdan
wrote:

I wonder why Canon doesn't make use of the pellicle mirror technology
in their DSLRs that
they used in the EOS RT.


Because it didn't work well in film days?


Why?


In film days, losing a stop meant shooting 200 instead of 100 ISO film or
400 instead of 200. The noticable grain jumped up significantly each
increase and different films also rendered colours slightly differently.
Bbeing low noise and low vibration meant the RT was perfect for indoor
concerts/recitals etc. where you are not trying to be obtrusive. The 'no
blackout' meant it was good for following action in sport. Except these
situations also require you to get the most out of your film sensitivity and
1 stop was critical. The fact that there is little discernible difference
between ISO100,200 and even 400 on the latest Canon sensors shows that this
isn't really a limitation anymore. Granted it would be a backwards step in
sensor sensitivity but they way sensor development has been going, it would
only be temporary one.


  #15  
Old October 14th 07, 05:42 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
Lobby Dosser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 112
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

"werdan" wrote:


"Lobby Dosser" wrote in message
newsxbQi.2844$I22.1733@trndny03...
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article
,
werdan wrote:

I wonder why Canon doesn't make use of the pellicle mirror
technology in their DSLRs that
they used in the EOS RT.

Because it didn't work well in film days?


Why?


In film days, losing a stop meant shooting 200 instead of 100 ISO film
or 400 instead of 200. The noticable grain jumped up significantly
each increase and different films also rendered colours slightly
differently.


Thanks for the answer. I thought it might be that and just presumed I'd
use faster lenses or faster film. For the uses you describe, I don't see
that as a problem.

Bbeing low noise and low vibration meant the RT was
perfect for indoor concerts/recitals etc. where you are not trying to
be obtrusive. The 'no blackout' meant it was good for following action
in sport. Except these situations also require you to get the most out
of your film sensitivity and 1 stop was critical. The fact that there
is little discernible difference between ISO100,200 and even 400 on
the latest Canon sensors shows that this isn't really a limitation
anymore. Granted it would be a backwards step in sensor sensitivity
but they way sensor development has been going, it would only be
temporary one.




  #16  
Old October 14th 07, 05:58 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
Randall Ainsworth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 559
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

In article DxbQi.2844$I22.1733@trndny03, Lobby Dosser
wrote:

Because it didn't work well in film days?


Why?


The viewfinder was noticeably dimmer. People left the things lens-up on
picnic tables and had holes burned in the shutter.
  #17  
Old October 14th 07, 05:59 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
Randall Ainsworth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 559
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

In article
, werdan
wrote:

In film days, losing a stop meant shooting 200 instead of 100 ISO film or
400 instead of 200. The noticable grain jumped up significantly each
increase and different films also rendered colours slightly differently.
Bbeing low noise and low vibration meant the RT was perfect for indoor
concerts/recitals etc. where you are not trying to be obtrusive. The 'no
blackout' meant it was good for following action in sport. Except these
situations also require you to get the most out of your film sensitivity and
1 stop was critical. The fact that there is little discernible difference
between ISO100,200 and even 400 on the latest Canon sensors shows that this
isn't really a limitation anymore. Granted it would be a backwards step in
sensor sensitivity but they way sensor development has been going, it would
only be temporary one.


So what's to stop retards from leaving the things lens-up on a picnic
table and burning a hole in the sensor? (They did it with the Pellix.)
  #18  
Old October 14th 07, 06:02 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
Lobby Dosser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 112
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

Randall Ainsworth wrote:

In article DxbQi.2844$I22.1733@trndny03, Lobby Dosser
wrote:

Because it didn't work well in film days?


Why?


The viewfinder was noticeably dimmer. People left the things lens-up
on picnic tables and had holes burned in the shutter.


OUCH!
  #19  
Old October 14th 07, 07:08 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
werdan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Latest model of Canon cameras


"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
In article
, werdan
wrote:

In film days, losing a stop meant shooting 200 instead of 100 ISO film or
400 instead of 200. The noticable grain jumped up significantly each
increase and different films also rendered colours slightly differently.
Bbeing low noise and low vibration meant the RT was perfect for indoor
concerts/recitals etc. where you are not trying to be obtrusive. The 'no
blackout' meant it was good for following action in sport. Except these
situations also require you to get the most out of your film sensitivity
and
1 stop was critical. The fact that there is little discernible difference
between ISO100,200 and even 400 on the latest Canon sensors shows that
this
isn't really a limitation anymore. Granted it would be a backwards step
in
sensor sensitivity but they way sensor development has been going, it
would
only be temporary one.


So what's to stop retards from leaving the things lens-up on a picnic
table and burning a hole in the sensor? (They did it with the Pellix.)


What's to stop retards from doing anything?


  #20  
Old October 14th 07, 07:12 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.equipment.large-format,comp.dsp,aus.photo,alt.photography
dj_nme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 399
Default Latest model of Canon cameras

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article
, werdan
wrote:


In film days, losing a stop meant shooting 200 instead of 100 ISO film or
400 instead of 200. The noticable grain jumped up significantly each
increase and different films also rendered colours slightly differently.
Bbeing low noise and low vibration meant the RT was perfect for indoor
concerts/recitals etc. where you are not trying to be obtrusive. The 'no
blackout' meant it was good for following action in sport. Except these
situations also require you to get the most out of your film sensitivity and
1 stop was critical. The fact that there is little discernible difference
between ISO100,200 and even 400 on the latest Canon sensors shows that this
isn't really a limitation anymore. Granted it would be a backwards step in
sensor sensitivity but they way sensor development has been going, it would
only be temporary one.



So what's to stop retards from leaving the things lens-up on a picnic
table and burning a hole in the sensor? (They did it with the Pellix.)


You mean that some twits managed to burn a hole through the metal
shutter in the EOS RT or EOS-1n RS, or just the cloth shutter curtain on
an older FD mount slr (this is also a problem with cloth FP shutter RF
cameras: Leica, Canon, Zorki, Fed, etc)?
The same damage sould be happening to almost all P&S digicams today
(instead it would be the sensor getting burned), as the sensor is always
exposed to allow live-view on the LCD and/or EVF.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Latest model of Canon cameras [email protected] Large Format Photography Equipment 45 October 25th 07 05:48 PM
Latest model of Canon cameras [email protected] Digital Photography 3 October 13th 07 01:09 AM
Latest model of Canon cameras [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 3 October 13th 07 01:09 AM
Latest model of Canon cameras [email protected] Medium Format Photography Equipment 2 October 12th 07 10:51 PM
FA: 6x7 projector, latest model, highest quality photoman Medium Format Equipment For Sale 0 May 30th 04 07:09 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.