An interesting thought but it would require an "inter-line" sensor (ala
point & shoot) rather than the "full frame" sensor now used in DSLR's.
Inter-line sensors can provide a real time image so there would be no
need for a seconday metering sensor. Inter-line sensors have part of
their photo-diode real-estate taken up by circuitry on the surface and
thus are noisier than full frame sensors. ("full frame" here with
respect to sensor type has to do with how the image data is read out and
not the size of the sensor)
However, it might not be possible to get rid of the mechanical shutter.
My Minolta A1 has both an electronic and mechanical shutter and I don't
completely understand how this arrangmement works. I think the
mechanical shutter closes to allow the chip to dump its charge and then,
when the shutter opens again, the actual timing of the exposure takes
place electronically within the chip as each row of pixels is read out.
I could be wrong there but the important point is that both shutters
are apparently required.
While considering pellicle mirrors (beam splitters) it occured to me
that you could use a conventional mirror but with a small pellicle
mirror or other form of beam splitter (which Oly has used before)
inserted in the light path ahead of the pentaprism. That could divert
light to the inter-line exposure sensor.
Yup, wait and see. One more day to go.
Chuck Norcutt
Andrew Fildes wrote:
> How about a pellicle mirror with no-shutter - the chip switches on
> and off. :-)
> Or like the E-1 user, we could wait and see.
> AndrewF
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|