Why No Electronic Shutters?

Why aren't there electronic shutters in DSLRs?

I think the 1D has an electronic shutter for 1/16000.

1D Classic did. Not sure about why they got rid of it.

I know there was a big thing about the way CMOS sensors are designed, but now that they do video, it seems as if they would have overcame any problems.

The 5D2 has half an electronic shutter (one "curtain). It's what's operating during video and Silent Shoot mode.

I suspect there are still problems getting the CMOS cooled enough between frames. It doesn't matter that much with video because blurred frames are less of a problem, nor does it matter so much with Silent Shoot because there will be whole seconds between frames.

Then there is the issue of having a mirror and an optical viewfinder. You would have to design an electronic viewfinder. The best of them fall way short of optical ones, at the moment.

There is a type of clear material that polarizes light when charged. I'd imagine with two of those perpendicular to each other you could get a really good if not full blackout when you charge them both. Release the charge to open the shutter, apply it to close it. It'd use a bit of power but the material is pretty efficient power wise. Who knows, we might see that in future cameras.

bohdank wrote in post #7633205
Then there is the issue of having a mirror and an optical viewfinder. You would have to design an electronic viewfinder. The best of them fall way short of optical ones, at the moment.

My camera has an electronic shutter and optical viewfinder (D40)... Maybe that issue only applies when it's a larger VF. The advantage of my shutter is that it's a bit quieter than the larger cameras and it gives me a 1/500 flash sync, which is just a firmware limit; I think there are hacks out there to make it faster. The D40 is, AFAIK, the only Nikon to have an electronic shutter; not even the D40x/D60 variants have it.

Thalagyrt wrote in post #7633649
There is a type of clear material that polarizes light when charged. I'd imagine with two of those perpendicular to each other you could get a really good if not full blackout when you charge them both. Release the charge to open the shutter, apply it to close it. It'd use a bit of power but the material is pretty efficient power wise. Who knows, we might see that in future cameras.

It depends on how quickly the material changes polarisation. Getting it to go through the polarised - unpolarised - polarised cycle in 125 μs might not be too easy.

hollis_f wrote in post #7635568
It depends on how quickly the material changes polarisation. Getting it to go through the polarised - unpolarised - polarised cycle in 125 μs might not be too easy.

That's likely why we aren't seeing it currently, but materials advances are being made every day, so I'd say it's just a matter of time before we see something fast enough. Maybe not within 5 years, but at some point down the line something like this will happen.

And then 1D3's will be going for $600 yipee!

bohlenphotography wrote in post #7635600
And then 1D3's will be going for $600 yipee!

Haha yup, but the 1D5/6/7/42 will be equally pricey as the 1D3 today, doh!

What about the SX1 IS? It doesn't have a mechanical shutter but uses a CMOS sensor.

That's not an SLR - it has an electronic viewfinder. Point and shoots don't have actual shutters as far as I know, and that qualifies as a point and shoot.

bohdank wrote in post #7633205
Then there is the issue of having a mirror and an optical viewfinder. You would have to design an electronic viewfinder. The best of them fall way short of optical ones, at the moment.

The original 1D had an electronic shutter, a mirror and an optical viewfinder. Same with many other CCD-based DSLRs. It's not an issue.