Hammering the nails deeper into the flipping mirror coffin...

RichA wrote:
Though I'm not thrilled with the need for a translucent mirror, this
camera should make some waves.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1108/11...a77preview.asp

What is the advantage of this design? Video?

On 2011-08-24 15:54 , Paul Furman wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1108/11...a77preview.asp

What is the advantage of this design? Video?

Reduced shutter lag
.SLR ~ 45-55 ms
.pellicle 5ms (possible (Leica RF's) - not sure what Sony achieve)

Fewer moving parts
Higher frame rate
Easier for the photog to follow action
.no VF "blackout"
.continuous action following
.less need to chimp
Video with continuous phase based AF

Downsides: 1/3 stop light loss. Dust. Reflections in some lighting
conditions (an issue in the first ones Sony did - not sure if they
sorted that out).



Meanwhile we wait for the A9x. I hope it's not more pixels (than the FF
24.6 at present) and would prefer it not be pellicle. We'll see.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

Alan Browne wrote:
On 2011-08-24 15:54 , Paul Furman wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1108/11...a77preview.asp

What is the advantage of this design? Video?

Reduced shutter lag
.SLR ~ 45-55 ms
.pellicle 5ms (possible (Leica RF's) - not sure what Sony achieve)

Fewer moving parts
Higher frame rate
Easier for the photog to follow action
.no VF "blackout"
.continuous action following
.less need to chimp
Video with continuous phase based AF

Downsides: 1/3 stop light loss. Dust. Reflections in some lighting
conditions (an issue in the first ones Sony did - not sure if they
sorted that out).

All very high end specialized stuff that doesn't indicate any sort of
trend for general consumer cameras by my reckoning. Their old pellicle
was presumably like that - a specialist's tool for particular situations.

Meanwhile we wait for the A9x. I hope it's not more pixels (than the FF
24.6 at present) and would prefer it not be pellicle. We'll see.