Trius said:
This is really interesting, and probably deserves a separate thread. It's funny, because when I was out shooting yesterday morning I was thinking about a DRF design which would preserve the rangefinder patch, but add auto-focus as an option, i.e., manual focus could be maintained with the same tactile feedback of manual focus lenses. Put the focusing in the body (move the sensor), not the lens.
And while we're at it, why is the focal plane shutter sacred? I'd just as soon have leaf shutters. An in-body leaf shutter system (a la the Olympus Ace) could be engineered.
I agree with you - but I suspect the engineers will be figuring out new ways of looking at things and doing them soon enough. They need two things - differentiation in the marketplace, and lower costs of manufacture.
Some random thoughts...
1) Manual RF is probably a non-starter. Not enough people are left who even know what it is - let alone why they'd want to use it. It would require people (average photographer - even enthusiasts) to learn skills.
2) Manual focus minus a mirror for dSLR, as far as I know, still depends upon focusing using an LCD. While I've had some discussions with various forum members who claim they can manually focus using their bridge digicam, now that I have one myself (Kodak P850) I can say from experience - nope. Can it be done? Barely, kind of. Critical focus? Not a bleeding chance. Focusing on an LCD is nothing even resembling focusing using an optical screen. However, if the technology for this were highly revamped, maybe. I understand that the DP1 has this - a 'magnified area' on the LCD back where you can twiddle a knob and perhaps focus manually. I dunno. Willing to believe it is possible - but not really.
3) However, if that bugaboo is ever beat, then form is no longer chained to the traditional SLR shape, and the distinctions between digicam, bridge, and dSLR will begin to blur in a serious way.
4) There are currently only two major advantages that dSLR cameras have that film cameras do not - besides immediacy. One is ability to set WB on the fly. The other is ability to set ISO on the fly. dSLRs have some drawbacks in that they have less dynamic range than color print film. However, this could change. Which brings me to
5) Kodak recently announced they have a new non-Bayer filter sensor design (non-Foveon, too). They originally announced it was going to allow them to build some high-ISO digicams, but then they announced they dropping a lot of their low-end digicams, and in general, they've just kind of farted around with their digicams recently. HOWEVER, if you follow the Kodak tech news (like I do, how sad is that), they recently partnered up with Motorola on new 5MP cell phone camera sensors - ultra small - but using their new technology, ISO 10,000, supposedly. Granted, this is not that great of a thing for us - but it may have application in larger sensors.
6) Fuji has had some luck with their S2~S5 dSLR cameras that wedding photogs love, due to their Nikon lens and body designs, with a different sensor - Fuji implants a combination of large and small sensors in the design, extending color sensitivity and dynamic range - which every wedding and event photographer needs. Kodak also claims enhanced dynamic range with their new sensor designs.
7) The next step is sensor designs that produce dynamic range that exceed that of all film, bringing ISO 10K and higher to the dSLR without penalty, or without as severe a penalty as both film and digital suffer now when those speeds are attempted. This will fundamentally change available light photography forever, not to mention make flashes much more useful.
8) I can imagine a sensor design that gains up or down in DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE SENSOR on the same exposure - imagine that. HDR in real-time. More like the way our eyes work.
9) With software tools like Dx0 that adjust for optical aberrations (and I've been reading patents, uber geek that I am), there is no reason that the next generation of dSLR cameras can't have 'cron emulation in their firmware - or Ultron, or whatever. Guys writing their own and passing them around like plugins.
10) The patents covering the ability to refocus are interesting and more is liable to be done in this area. The argument against small sensor size could be overcome if a) small sensors produced less noise and b) you could obtain the same DoF control in a virtual way as you can now with a physically larger or smaller recording medium. No reason, technically, why a digicam with a tiny sensor could not produce the same DoF effects as an 8x10 view camera. I would not want to write that software, but the theory is pretty clear at this point.
11) Electrostatically-controlled liquid lenses. Oooh.
There's more. I love being alive at this time in photography. New worlds opening up. Photography is in flux - at the moment, digital is eclipsing film in availability, but not yet in capability. In the future, it will begin to do things no film process ever could - and then we can REALLY have some fun. All the old rules out the window.
