Todd Stanley wrote:
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> I see what you are saying now - use a smaller sensor and compensate for it
> by odding optics (not a teleconverter though) or by moving the lens.
It's pretty much like a teleconverter, only in reverse; it concentrates
the entire frame area into a smaller centre portion, rather than magnifying
a centre portion to fill the entire frame.
> You
> can move the lens closer to the sensor, but I think that will totally mess
> up the focusing, you'd basically take a huge hit in the minimum focus
> distance, or may not even be able to focus the lens at all even at infinity
> depending on how close you move the lens. Plus, you still need room for
> the mirror, but I'm guessing you could get away with a smaller mirror.
It will have no effect on the minimum focussing distance, just as a
teleconverter has no effect on the minimum focussing distance on a lens.
> The idea of adding optics between the lens and sensor is an interesting
> idea, but you have another problem - the mirror box. I suppose you could
> have the optics flip up into the mirror box after the mirror gets out of
> way, but that will add camera shake, complexity, cost, and shutter lag.
> Another option would be to get rid of the mirrorbox, and basically have a
> digital K-mount rangefinder. You'd still be able to do TTL viewing by
> using the LCD screen. I don't think this would be a very popular option as
> the LCD screen would eat the batteries, plus it would be too low-res for
> accurate manual focusing.
You can have a fine focusing mode where the LCD only shows a small part
of the total frame (about 10x magnification, given the current resolution
of LCDs and sensors; about the size of one autofocus zone in the MZ-S).
> Yet another solution might be to put the optics
> where the shutter curtain is, so they will be out of the way of the mirror,
> and have the sensor located behind these optics. It would easily be the
> fattest K-mount camera ever, but without film transport it might still be
> small, but definently wierd shaped.
You don't need a shutter curtain, either. But by the time you've lost the
mirror box, the shutter curtain, and the film transport mechanism, what are
you left with?
> My guess is that ideas like this have been thought of by the engineers from
> the camera makers, but have been shot down for various reasons.
Some of the ideas (such as TTL viewing using a digital LCD viewfinder)
are already in production.
--
John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc.
(650)933-8295 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991
(650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389
Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
