Bill,
I have the impression that it's a lot easier to make a digital
camera with an actual shutter. Virtual film can use the existing
shutter in a film camera. The software will be a lot easier
to manage if it has a shutter sensor. One can imagine the
logic getting very confused by something like fireworks or
Aurora. That could be done with ultrasound.
The reason to have virtual film is existing M and R
cameras.
For an all new design of camera, separating the sensor
from the rest of the camera as in the Hasselblad makes
consumate sense.
I haven't looked at electronic shutters for awhile, but last I
knew they were not totally opaque when "closed" and needed
a mechanical shutter in front of them to prevent leakage.
They are capable of speed in microseconds.
CCDs in are turned on and off electrically,
which enables you to do the same kinds of things as electronic
shutters. The limit is the time it takes to turn large numbers of
pixels on and off rapidly. I've read that these limitations are
being overcome, and the gap between still and video cameras
will close, and the difference will become only a software
switch, fairly soon.
All of which strongly favors a modular camera design, for sure.
Charlie.
---- "William B. Abbott III" <wbabbott3@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie, Douglas, Alex,
We are now back to the modular camera that some of us were talking
about a couple of years ago:
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
