Non-Sony translucent mirrors?

[Ksanti]

I'm wondering if there will be any other companies coming out with their own form of SLT cameras, as sports photography could be a fair part of my shooting, and given no DSLR can continue to autofocus while bursting that quickly, and those that can burst that quickly are several times more expensive.

I have Canon and Nikon mount lenses already, and if it's likely that these companies will bring out their own versions of this technology in the forseeable future I'll wait for them, but if Sony have patented it or Canon and Nikon have said explicitly that they won't be making translucent-mirror cameras, I may be tempted into jumping ship.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[mastertrinity]

I can see the point of the translucent but I don't like how reliant Sony are becoming on the technology, if you noticed what they did with the Sony a55 when they brought that out they also brought the non translucent a580 so it caters for both needs, those who want optical viewfinders and regular controls and then those like yourself who want that continuous focus and speed. I wish they would make a model and then make one trans and one non trans to help but Sony have said that the future is with SLT's and mirrorless, however Sony have stated that the next FF cameras to be realised will be normal SLR's and I'm guessing this is going to stay how it is until they get the technology for a FF SLT which I can easily see Sony doing.

As for other brands, they might and they might not take on board the idea. It's good though if only Sony have it because then they appeal to a specialist market and gives them their USP. I would happily buy either SLR or SLT because I only shoot portraiture, urbex, and sometimes product work for businesses which either of the camera's would cope with. It's down to togs like you who need the speed and that's where you have decisions on either SLT or traditional SLR.

 

[Critical I]

I'm wondering if there will be any other companies coming out with their own form of SLT cameras, as sports photography could be a fair part of my shooting, and given no DSLR can continue to autofocus while bursting that quickly, and those that can burst that quickly are several times more expensive.

I have Canon and Nikon mount lenses already, and if it's likely that these companies will bring out their own versions of this technology in the forseeable future I'll wait for them, but if Sony have patented it or Canon and Nikon have said explicitly that they won't be making translucent-mirror cameras, I may be tempted into jumping ship.

Thanks,
Matt

They can burst at 11fps, but cannot provide a live video feed at the same time, so you have no idea whats happening. All you get is a jerky slide show of action just after the event.

Not a substitute for a 1D or D3s just yet (or a D300s or 7D).

 

[lexie]

i have a sony at the minute but i'm seriously considering changing next year because of the big slt push they seem to be on. maybe they realised they aren't going to make a massive impact on canon/nikon sales, and are going in a different direction and hoping to get a jump on the big two if slt's become the next big thing.

i've heard rumours of an a700 replacement coming next year, with both slr and slt versions available. but like i say only rumours, someone else will no doubt have more info on this.

 

[TheBigYin]

I was actually considering buying a Canon camera with the pellicle mirror from Ebay a few days ago - the EOS-1N RS film body. Thought it would be the perfect companion for my EOS-3. Sadly I hesitated a little too long, and someone beat me to it on a B.I.N.

Still - 10 frames per second on film is an expensive appetite to feed I suppose