Do you expect an EOS 5D Mark V anytime EVER?

Croasdail wrote in post #19005931
To the original question... nope. Never. Will never ever ever happen.In two years from now buying a new camera with a shutter will be like trying to buy a car with a manual transmission. Camera sensors/cameras will soon be a single chip design with everything all one unit. A mirror just adds complexity and potential fault, plus it drives up build cost.

Mechanical shutters are part of many mirror-less cameras.

Most electronic shutter technology is too slow not to also have a mechanical shutter.

Croasdail wrote in post #19005931
To the original question... nope. Never. Will never ever ever happen.In two years from now buying a new camera with a shutter will be like trying to buy a car with a manual transmission. Camera sensors/cameras will soon be a single chip design with everything all one unit. A mirror just adds complexity and potential fault, plus it drives up build cost.

One cannot escape the fact that if you wish to use electronic flash for supplemental illumination of low ambient light, you still need to use a MECHANICAL shutter.

The problem for car manufacturers is that each permutation of car has to be tested...eliminate the manual transmission, eliminate the need for costly testing for certification! That is why fewer and fewer cars come in manual tranmission version in the USA, even if the car is made abroad with manual transmission predominant among the versions available. No costly certification issues for mirrorless vs. dSLR.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19005960
Mechanical shutters are part of many mirror-less cameras.

Most electronic shutter technology is too slow not to also have a mechanical shutter.

Do you have that reversed? The Nikon D1 is the fastest mechanical shutter at 1/16000 sec, while electronic shutters are 1/32000 sec, as in the Fujifilm X-Pro2.

Even as far back as WW2, electronic shutters were used with speeds as fast as 3 microseconds. In the 1950's they were imaging atomic bomb explosions with electronic shutter speeds of 10 nanoseconds. Look up "rapatronic camera".

Capn Jack wrote in post #19005986
Do you have that reversed? The Nikon D1 is the fastest mechanical shutter at 1/16000 sec, while electronic shutters are 1/32000 sec, as in the Fujifilm X-Pro2..

Actually, the Nikon D1 and the Canon 1D both had 1/16,000 shutter speeds DUE to "Electronic shutters"!

The early DSLRs used CCD vs CMOS image sensors,. and those sensors lent themselves to "electronic shutters" in a way that the early CMOS could not manage. These were the first "electronic shutters" in digital cameras. They (obviously) still had the SLR's mechanical shutter as well,. but it was the sensors ability to take two shoots with one shutter opening that gave them the doubling of the mechanical shutters capability. The same was true of flash sync, which to this day no SLR has matched the flash sync of these pro CCD equipped DSLR.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19006071
Actually, the Nikon D1 and the Canon 1D both had 1/16,000 shutter speeds DUE to "Electronic shutters"!

The early DSLRs used CCD vs CMOS image sensors,. and those sensors lent themselves to "electronic shutters" in a way that the early CMOS could not manage. These were the first "electronic shutters" in digital cameras. They (obviously) still had the SLR's mechanical shutter as well,. but it was the sensors ability to take two shoots with one shutter opening that gave them the doubling of the mechanical shutters capability. The same was true of flash sync, which to this day no SLR has matched the flash sync of these pro CCD equipped DSLR.

It seems you are saying that, for those cameras, the electronic shutter was faster than the mechanical shutter. If so, that supports what I was saying and thanks for the correction.

Capn Jack wrote in post #19006104
It seems you are saying that, for those cameras, the electronic shutter was faster than the mechanical shutter. If so, that supports what I was saying and thanks for the correction.

Yes. My reply was backing you up.
I do agree with you that modern electronic shutters are faster,. and they continue to get faster. Mechanical shutters for SLRs seem to have maxed out at 1/8000 for over two decades.

that said, John did say "most" and for whatever reason, I think a lot of cameras with both do rely on the combining of the two shutters to get top speed. I actually have no idea if the antiques we mention above could have done it purely electronically at the time. They certainly were not built to.

Capn Jack wrote in post #19005986
Do you have that reversed?.

No. I thought it was clear fro the context that we weren't talking about exposure time, but the speed at which new rows of pixels begin and end their exposure.

Capn Jack wrote in post #19006104
It seems you are saying that, for those cameras, the electronic shutter was faster than the mechanical shutter. If so, that supports what I was saying and thanks for the correction.

The total time from when the first row of pixels begins exposure to when the last row stops collecting charge is slower with the electronic rolling shutters.

"Shutter speed" and "the speed of the shutter" are different things.

I have a super-zoom with a "shutter speed" of 1/40,000. It takes about 1/12 or so for the whole frame to be exposed.

This is what happens when people forget that high "shutter speeds" are generally a bit of a farce, and actually take quite a long time, especially with historic rolling electronic shutters.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19006122
Yes. My reply was backing you up.
I do agree with you that modern electronic shutters are faster,. and they continue to get faster. Mechanical shutters for SLRs seem to have maxed out at 1/8000 for over two decades.

that said, John did say "most" and for whatever reason, I think a lot of cameras with both do rely on the combining of the two shutters to get top speed. I actually have no idea if the antiques we mention above could have done it purely electronically at the time. They certainly were not built to.

I don't really understand why the speed of the shutter couldn't be higher as the actual shutter speed is constant whether its a 1/200 or 1/16000. The only thing that changes is the timing between the first curtain and the second. The Slo Mo guys have a great video showing this. I suspect that at 1/16000 the slit is almost non-existant and can't be easily divided in 1/2 again. Even at 1/8000 the slit is quite small.

Croasdail wrote in post #19005931
.
Camera sensors/cameras will soon be a single chip design with everything all one unit.
.

.
I have read this over and over and over, and still can't figure out what you mean.

Could you please explain?


.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19006139
The total time from when the first row of pixels begins exposure to when the last row stops collecting charge is slower with the electronic rolling shutters.

"Shutter speed" and "the speed of the shutter" are different things.

I have a super-zoom with a "shutter speed" of 1/40,000. It takes about 1/12 or so for the whole frame to be exposed.

This is what happens when people forget that high "shutter speeds" are generally a bit of a farce, and actually take quite a long time, especially with historic rolling electronic shutters.

Rolling shutters aren't the only kind of electronic shutter. Global shutters are really the "historic" electronic shutter, used as far back as WW2, and on CCD cameras in different forms.

1/12 sec? That seems very slow. Which camera?

John Sheehy wrote in post #19006129
No. I thought it was clear fro the context that we weren't talking about exposure time, but the speed at which new rows of pixels begin and end their exposure.

No, it wasn't very clear that we weren't talking exposure time in that fashion.

Croasdail wrote in post #19005931
To the original question... nope. Never. Will never ever ever happen.In two years from now buying a new camera with a shutter will be like trying to buy a car with a manual transmission. Camera sensors/cameras will soon be a single chip design with everything all one unit. A mirror just adds complexity and potential fault, plus it drives up build cost.

I don't know if it will be in 2 years before the shutter can be ditched. It will probably be longer, but I think that day will come.

The technology exists for a good electronic shutter. It is in some cinema cameras now, and some industrial cameras: https://www.teledyneda​lsa.com …r/global-shutter-imaging/

Capn Jack wrote in post #19006150
Rolling shutters aren't the only kind of electronic shutter. Global shutters are really the "historic" electronic shutter, used as far back as WW2, and on CCD cameras in different forms.

There are very few CCDs used in current digital cameras, and most real-world cameras currently used still have slow electronic shutters. The A9 is a little slow, even compared to most mechanical shutters in recent DSLR, which can be roughly twice as fast.

1/12 and 1/13 were typical of most historic cameras of a decade ago with rolling shutters, recently they have gone only to 1/20 to 1/30, other than Sony's 1/160 in the A9.

If exposure time were the topic of discussion, specific shutter speeds would be mentioned. "The speed of the shutter" does not necessarily refer to the shortest exposure. That would be "the shortest exposure time" or "the maximum shutter speed". Shutters actually move much slower in most cameras than the "maximum shutter speed" would suggest.

Capn Jack wrote in post #19005986
Do you have that reversed? The Nikon D1 is the fastest mechanical shutter at 1/16000 sec, while electronic shutters are 1/32000 sec, as in the Fujifilm X-Pro2.

Even as far back as WW2, electronic shutters were used with speeds as fast as 3 microseconds. In the 1950's they were imaging atomic bomb explosions with electronic shutter speeds of 10 nanoseconds. Look up "rapatronic camera".

The shortest exposure time per pixel or row of pixels is not directly related to the speed of the mechanical or virtual electronic shutter "curtains".

The shortest pixel exposure time is down to the granularity of the timing of the electronics, and for mechanical shutters, the ability to keep a consistent narrow gap for consistent exposure, and slit diffraction could occur if the curtains got close enough due to inconsistency.

It is a given that shorter pixel exposure times are generally had with a fully electronic shutter, for any given CMOS sensor that has mechanical shutters, too. It is easier to get the "slit" to be consistent.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19006430
There are very few CCDs used in current digital cameras, and most real-world cameras currently used still have slow electronic shutters. The A9 is a little slow, even compared to most mechanical shutters in recent DSLR, which can be roughly twice as fast.

1/12 and 1/13 were typical of most historic cameras of a decade ago with rolling shutters, recently they have gone only to 1/20 to 1/30, other than Sony's 1/160 in the A9.

I'm very sure that's incorrect. Rolling shutters are used for video and even cell phones deliver frame rates of 1/30 sec or better without distortion. Huawei has been impressive here.
https://camerajabber.c​om/huawei-p30-pro-camera-review/

For video, that's a new image every 1/30 of a second. Everything, including the shutter, is done in that time.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19006430
If exposure time were the topic of discussion, specific shutter speeds would be mentioned. "The speed of the shutter" does not necessarily refer to the shortest exposure. That would be "the shortest exposure time" or "the maximum shutter speed". Shutters actually move much slower in most cameras than the "maximum shutter speed" would suggest.

Please prove it by citing credible sources.

In any case, the question was about eliminating mechanical shutters over the next couple of years. I don't think over 2 years, but perhaps a little longer. The question didn't specify any particular type of electronic shutter. We can do it over time by increasing the reset/read cycle of CMOS pixels, or by adding the circuitry for a global electronic shutter. Maybe someone will come up with another technique, such as a low-voltage kerr cell.

Canon has some patents on CMOS global shutters now:
https://www.canonnews.​com …ked-sensor-global-shutter
https://patents.google​.com/patent/EP2109306A​2

My employer makes CMOS based, global shutter, cameras available now that deliver 86 megapixels at 16 frames per second, and "only" 12 megapixels at 168 frames per second:
https://www.teledyneda​lsa.com …r/global-shutter-imaging/

These sort of things will trickle down to consumer/pro cameras, but it often takes longer than one expects. I was using back-illuminated sensors in the last century, but they only started showing up in DSLRs in the past several years. They were hideously expensive then.