Patent: Video from Digital SLRs at DVinfo.net

Chris Hurd · April 6th, 2008, 11:50 AM

"In order to operate at 30 frames per second (the video capture speed called for in Terada’s patent), the mirror would have to bounce up and down 3 times faster than the rocket-fast Canon EOS 1D Mark III. Clearly, that’s not a desirable (or quiet) way to do video on a DSLR.

The patent calls for a mirror that remains in the path of light. It’s a special mirror though. It reflects 30% of the light and transmits 70% of the light, allowing the light to make its way to the image sensor without moving anywhere."

See the full story at http://www.photographybay.com/2008/0...e-mode-patent/

Martin Catt · April 6th, 2008, 12:07 PM

Too much prior art. The magic mirror is nothing but a beam splitter, already used in the classic Pellix 35mm camera. The beam splitter routed some of the light to the viewfinder, and let the rest fall on the film plane. One of the quietest 35mm cameras I ever used, no flopping mirror.

Besides, how do you think they split the light to 3 CCD's in 3-CCD camcorders? Beam splitters.

Don't think a patent would survive a serious legal challenge.

Martin

Richard Alvarez · April 6th, 2008, 12:39 PM

Lots of patents rely on prior art for part of their approval. My take on the article is that his Automatic Focusing algorithm/program is the NEW technology. This is the kernel of his patent, not the mirror - which as you correctly pointed out is 'old school' cine gear.

I think the article is not very clear, but it seems as if he's developed a program that will sense the different mode, and apply some sort of auto focusing correction that will prevent the lens from hunting and 'breathing' while shooting in cine mode. At least, that's what I took away from it.

Robert Lane · April 9th, 2008, 10:31 PM

Martin is correct; the Pellicle Mirror concept is nothing new even to still cameras.

In the late 80's Canon produced the EOS RT and later the EOS 1n RS which both had the pellicle mirror. The viewfinders in both cameras were darker than standard-mirror cameras and weren't widely received by the full-time pros who it was marketed for, but did find a home partly with wedding and event shooters who wanted a nearly-silent SLR for their work.

April 6th, 2008, 11:50 AM	#1
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Patent: Video from Digital SLRs "In order to operate at 30 frames per second (the video capture speed called for in Terada’s patent), the mirror would have to bounce up and down 3 times faster than the rocket-fast Canon EOS 1D Mark III. Clearly, that’s not a desirable (or quiet) way to do video on a DSLR. The patent calls for a mirror that remains in the path of light. It’s a special mirror though. It reflects 30% of the light and transmits 70% of the light, allowing the light to make its way to the image sensor without moving anywhere." See the full story at http://www.photographybay.com/2008/0...e-mode-patent/ __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

April 6th, 2008, 12:07 PM	#2
Martin Catt Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: The Colony TX Posts: 327	Too much prior art. The magic mirror is nothing but a beam splitter, already used in the classic Pellix 35mm camera. The beam splitter routed some of the light to the viewfinder, and let the rest fall on the film plane. One of the quietest 35mm cameras I ever used, no flopping mirror. Besides, how do you think they split the light to 3 CCD's in 3-CCD camcorders? Beam splitters. Don't think a patent would survive a serious legal challenge. Martin __________________ Canon XF300, Canon 5DMkII, Canon XL2, Rolls MX422 mixer, Zoom H4N, AT899 lavs, AT2020's, Azden SGM 1X shotgun, Manfrotto 501 head on 351 tripod

April 6th, 2008, 12:39 PM	#3
Richard Alvarez Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: San Mateo, CA Posts: 3,840	Lots of patents rely on prior art for part of their approval. My take on the article is that his Automatic Focusing algorithm/program is the NEW technology. This is the kernel of his patent, not the mirror - which as you correctly pointed out is 'old school' cine gear. I think the article is not very clear, but it seems as if he's developed a program that will sense the different mode, and apply some sort of auto focusing correction that will prevent the lens from hunting and 'breathing' while shooting in cine mode. At least, that's what I took away from it.

April 9th, 2008, 10:31 PM	#4
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,788 Images: 15	Martin is correct; the Pellicle Mirror concept is nothing new even to still cameras. In the late 80's Canon produced the EOS RT and later the EOS 1n RS which both had the pellicle mirror. The viewfinders in both cameras were darker than standard-mirror cameras and weren't widely received by the full-time pros who it was marketed for, but did find a home partly with wedding and event shooters who wanted a nearly-silent SLR for their work.