ghost said:
anybody have one? they look interesting, and would make a cheap rig for a fast fd 28/2 or ef 28/1.8, and would pair up great with a 85/1.8 or 85/1.2! i wonder why dslr makers haven't pounced on the idea when the pellicle mirror seals off the sensor from dust, and any dust that settles on the mirror won't make spots (or would it?). better high iso image quality also alleviates the third stop loss of light. is the pellicle mirror extra delicate or something?
The viewfinder is darker, too. All the high ISO settings in the world won't save you if you can't see anything through the finder in a dark theatre, which is where a 85/1.2 would actually be useful. The Pellix finder is a dark hole that will make you cry for a Nikon F finder, let alone a quality rangefinder.
Dust getting on the mirror is worse than dust on the sensor...the mirrors in the RT and Pellix are excedingly thin and are very, very fragile, so they are harder to clean than a sensor. Good luck finding parts anymore if you scratch the mirror, too.
I'd rather have a DSLR like my D1h with really short shutter lag and a little blackout than a piece of delicate plastic that parts aren't availible for anymore. The AF in the RT is absolutly pathetic, too. I like my Nikon CAM1300, especially with a good AF-S lens.
As for a film camera, I'd take my F2 anyday. At least I know if that puppy breaks there are people who can fix it. I also don't mind a little blackout. I learned to anticipate action when I started shooting (insert "poor kid with only a film camera and only a little film money" story here).
Not trying to rain on your parade or anything, there's just reasons why the systems didn't catch on too well outside of Canon (except some ultra high-speed, special-order nikons which cost way too much). There are just better tools for the job.
Have a nice day,
Bob
