Re: That slapping mirror

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Matt Ion, Jul 7, 2008.

  1. Matt Ion

    Matt Ion Guest

    J.H. Holliday wrote:
    > "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Took the plunge and just bought my first DLSR. Could so far afford the
    >> luxury of using cameras without slapping mirrors (my last camera was a
    >> Sony R1).
    >>
    >> Well, this slapping mirror is really an earthquake. When you press the
    >> shutter, it makes the entire camera vibrate.
    >> I'm still awaiting delivery of a 70-300mm lens, but I'm wondering if
    >> this slapping mirror will compromise sharpness at long focal lengths.
    >> What is the solution here? Using MLU for every shot can't be an option.
    >> --
    >>
    >> Alfred Molon
    >> ------------------------------
    >>

    >
    > Ya know, people asked the same question about the Nikon F when they brought
    > it our in the 1950's....


    I was just thinking, it hasn't been a major issue for the half-century
    or so that SLRs have been around, so why should it be now?
    Matt Ion, Jul 7, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Matt Ion <> wrote:
    > J.H. Holliday wrote:
    >> "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Took the plunge and just bought my first DLSR. Could so far afford the
    >>> luxury of using cameras without slapping mirrors (my last camera was a
    >>> Sony R1).
    >>>
    >>> Well, this slapping mirror is really an earthquake. When you press the
    >>> shutter, it makes the entire camera vibrate.
    >>> I'm still awaiting delivery of a 70-300mm lens, but I'm wondering if
    >>> this slapping mirror will compromise sharpness at long focal lengths.
    >>> What is the solution here? Using MLU for every shot can't be an option.
    >>> --
    >>>
    >>> Alfred Molon
    >>> ------------------------------
    >>>

    >>
    >> Ya know, people asked the same question about the Nikon F when they brought
    >> it our in the 1950's....


    > I was just thinking, it hasn't been a major issue for the half-century
    > or so that SLRs have been around, so why should it be now?


    It's always been a major issue for those photographers who took the
    kind of photographs which were affected by it, which most
    photographers didn't. So MLU tended only to appear in the more
    expensive professional models.

    --
    Chris Malcolm DoD #205
    IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
    [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
    Chris Malcolm, Jul 8, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Matt Ion

    Hans Kruse Guest

    "Chris Malcolm" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > It's always been a major issue for those photographers who took the
    > kind of photographs which were affected by it, which most
    > photographers didn't. So MLU tended only to appear in the more
    > expensive professional models.


    Many cheaper models have MLU also. The Canon Rebel models have had it since
    the 350D.

    --
    Med venlig hilsen/Kind regards,
    Hans Kruse www.hanskruse.com, http://hans-kruse.blogspot.com/
    Hans Kruse, Jul 8, 2008
    #3
  4. Matt Ion

    Hans Kruse Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <48735d2f$0$90276$>, Hans Kruse
    > says...
    >>
    >> Many cheaper models have MLU also. The Canon Rebel models have had
    >> it since the 350D.

    >
    > In fact it costs nothing to implement MLU, since any DSLR is capable
    > of lifting the mirror. It's a marketing decision to leave out this
    > feature.


    Correct and now with live view most cameras have this built-in anyway. Most
    of the time I combine live view and MLU in this way.

    --
    Med venlig hilsen/Kind regards,
    Hans Kruse www.hanskruse.com, http://hans-kruse.blogspot.com/
    Hans Kruse, Jul 8, 2008
    #4
  5. Matt Ion

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Alfred
    Molon <> wrote:

    > > Many cheaper models have MLU also. The Canon Rebel models have had it since
    > > the 350D.

    >
    > In fact it costs nothing to implement MLU, since any DSLR is capable of
    > lifting the mirror. It's a marketing decision to leave out this feature.


    that's a large part of it, but it's not 100% marketing. if the mirror
    can stay up, the shutter has to be fully light-tight. on a camera that
    does not have true mirror lockup, they can cut costs with a shutter
    that 'leaks' a little.
    nospam, Jul 8, 2008
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alotta Fagina

    Re: That slapping mirror

    Alotta Fagina, Jul 6, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    821
    Paul Furman
    Jul 15, 2008
  2. Pete D

    Re: That slapping mirror

    Pete D, Jul 6, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    265
    Pete D
    Jul 7, 2008
  3. Don Stauffer in Minnesota

    Re: That slapping mirror

    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Jul 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    532
    Chris Malcolm
    Jul 10, 2008
  4. Bruce

    Re: Death of the slapping mirror

    Bruce, Aug 24, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    691
    John A.
    Sep 2, 2010
  5. Tim Conway

    Re: Death of the slapping mirror

    Tim Conway, Aug 24, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    261
    Bruce
    Aug 24, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page