Is the 7D the end of DSLR as we know them ?

As the 7D has a translucent lcd screen overly on the focusing screen is this the end of mirror boxes and electro mechanical shutters as we know them

Without the shutter/ mirror in the way and the sensor uncovered so to speak, it would not be difficult to project the image into the viewfinder and use a completely electronic shutter , thereby eliminating the mechanical aspects of the DSLR


just a few ramblings for I have no insight into the future

I like the fact that a mirror doesn't use electricity and has a resolution higher than any electronic device that will ever exist, so if it comes to consumer choice then for me, the SLR stays as is.

We're already there - They're called Micro 4/3 cameras.

Mike Deep wrote in post #9296342
We're already there - They're called Micro 4/3 cameras.

Interesting. Will people even use tele lenses on these bodies?

I recently had a chance to look at and take a few photos with a friends LUMIX. I was prepared to be more impressed than I was. For quick action and high contrast situations the lag in the viewfinder and the necessity of the viewfinder itself to set an exposure (brightness) level and a lack of available brightness range (blocked highlights and shadows in the view) suggest that the concept is not yet to fruition.

The devil is in the details, weren't able to clearly see details.... Perhaps someday, not yet.

Cheers: T

For me, the mirror (and therefore being able to look through the lens via the viewfinder) is what makes an SLR such a joy to use.

Steve-R wrote in post #9298888
For me, the mirror (and therefore being able to look through the lens via the viewfinder) is what makes an SLR such a joy to use.

I think the "legacy" SLR mirror technology and the sensor view/autofocus technology are complementary, rather than competitive. They each have their place, but neither is a replacement for the other.

What I would like is to be able to go full manual if the battery/electronics fail....I know, it's a giant step backwards.

Mike R wrote in post #9298934
What I would like is to be able to go full manual if the battery/electronics fail....I know, it's a giant step backwards.

You'll need a camera body that will let you shove a roll of film in there as well when the battery fails. Else w/o power, I don't think the sensor can capture anything.

"We're already there - They're called Micro 4/3 cameras".

I've never understood why the 4/3rds system is so popular with the photo mags. All I see is a cheap skate system that has up to now totally failed to deliver. As an alternative to the otherwise standard Bayer arrangement it's of passing curiosity but no more.

jwcdds wrote in post #9298954
You'll need a camera body that will let you shove a roll of film in there as well when the battery fails. Else w/o power, I don't think the sensor can capture anything.

Could be the wave of the future.

It would be convenient to get sync speed up near that of the "G" series

dave kadolph wrote in post #9298975
It would be convenient to get sync speed up near that of the "G" series

Sync speed is dependent on the shutter technology being used. It will necessarily be limited if a mechanical shutter is used instead of an "electronic" shutter.

My Canon FTb is my battery free backup I dreamed for years that they might make a digital back for the F-1, the A-1, T-90 or even an EOS that has a replaceable back for date/data but alas it was not to be. At least I can share the EF lenses between film and digital bodies but some days it would have been nice if I could have avoided refocusing while switching.

A long time ago didn't they have special cameras with pellicle mirrors to allow for a high FPS? The problem with that is the translucent mirror only transmits a portion of the light to the viewfinder and hence makes the viewfinder appear dimmer than it should be.

I'm just happy to have a digital camera.