IIRC Darren asked, why a DSLR is called *single* lens reflex camera. Just 
today I stumbled across this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_lens_reflex

Apparently the german company inventing this type of camera (or so says 
german wikipedia), Rollei, just closed down. In the end they seemed to 
make modern middle format cameras. It seems there are not many german 
companies around anymore in this business. Ok, there is Leica, but they 
are ridiculous expensive. Zeiss is mostly producing for industrial 
applications. A lot of companies around Dresden closed down. It seems all 
this industry was excelled by japanese companies. I wonder why - I mean I 
can name several excellent japanese companies (and I'm very satisfied 
with my Nikon D80) but if I would want to buy an excellent german DSLR I 
simply couldn't because no one here makes it anymore. The thing is, that 
there was a lot of optical industry and know how in germany. Did they 
simply slumber it? Anyone know why they lost?

Post a reply to this message

Florian Pesth <fpe### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> Apparently the german company inventing this type of camera (or so says
> german wikipedia), Rollei, just closed down. In the end they seemed to
> make modern middle format cameras. It seems there are not many german
> companies around anymore in this business. Ok, there is Leica, but they
> are ridiculous expensive. Zeiss is mostly producing for industrial
> applications. A lot of companies around Dresden closed down. It seems all
> this industry was excelled by japanese companies. I wonder why - I mean I
> can name several excellent japanese companies (and I'm very satisfied
> with my Nikon D80) but if I would want to buy an excellent german DSLR I
> simply couldn't because no one here makes it anymore. The thing is, that
> there was a lot of optical industry and know how in germany. Did they
> simply slumber it? Anyone know why they lost?

This is my interpretation of the events:

Virtually all of the former German Democratic Republic (aka East Germany) has
had a rough time in the transition from socialism to capitalism; traditional
markets in the Warsaw Pact countries became difficult to maintain due to the
political shift, and also less profitable due to the adoption of the West
German currency; the only existing footholds in the western world had been in
niche markets for top-quality optics, which had been a welcome byproduct during
the socialist era to get western money into the country, but weren't enough to
sustain the whole optical industry that had developed in that area.

The West German optical industry had basically been overrun by Asian products
much earlier, and had already retreated into the niche markets of high-quality
optics by the time Germany was re-united in 1989.

The major reason was that the German companies had always been excellent at
producing high-quality optics, but Asian companies (at that time mostly
Japanese) were better at virtually everything else, like electronics, systems,
and - last not least - pricing. With technical innovation in optics progressing
slower than in those other fields, the German companies rather quickly fell
behind on the end-user market, and had to give it up, retreating to production
of highly specialized cameras as well as optics for other companies'
high-quality ranges of products.

Post a reply to this message

Florian Pesth wrote:
> IIRC Darren asked, why a DSLR is called *single* lens reflex camera. 

Actually, I asked why it was called a single lens *reflex* camera. But 
that's cool. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

I'm guessing, but it's probably because, in the film cameras, anyway, 
one looked and focused
through the single lens via a 45 degree mirror (reflector) which flipped 
out of the way when the
shutter was released. A prismatic reflector reflected the light through 
the view finder (and corrected
the image reversal caused by the first mirror). I don't suppose digital 
SLR's need these mirrors;
perhaps they are called SLR's because the look like SLR's.

David

Darren New wrote:
> Florian Pesth wrote:
>> IIRC Darren asked, why a DSLR is called *single* lens reflex camera. 
> 
> Actually, I asked why it was called a single lens *reflex* camera. But 
> that's cool. :-)
>

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:39:09 +0200, David H. Burns  
<dhb### [at] cherokeetelnet> wrote:
> I don't suppose digital SLR's need these mirrors;
> perhaps they are called SLR's because the look like SLR's.

Digital SLRs - by definition - have mirrors.

There is a new class of small SLR-like cameras that do away with the  
mirror; these are informally known by the acronym EVIL (Electronic  
Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens).



-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

David H. Burns wrote:
> I'm guessing, but it's probably because,

Well, yes, the answer was provided some time back. Welcome to the newsgroup. ;-)

> perhaps they are called SLR's because the look like SLR's.

No, they still have the mirrors. Noisy buggers.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

> No, they still have the mirrors. Noisy buggers.

And they cause vibration too.  I like the feature on my 450D where you can 
lock up the mirror before taking the actual exposure, useful for 
astrophotography.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> No, they still have the mirrors. Noisy buggers.
> 
> And they cause vibration too.  I like the feature on my 450D where you 
> can lock up the mirror before taking the actual exposure, useful for 
> astrophotography.

Yeah, this has a setting where you can delay the exposure to two seconds 
after the mirror moves or something.  Even the little point-and-shoots have 
that now.


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:31:40 +0200, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> scott wrote:
>>> No, they still have the mirrors. Noisy buggers.
>>  And they cause vibration too.  I like the feature on my 450D where you  
>> can lock up the mirror before taking the actual exposure, useful for  
>> astrophotography.
>
> Yeah, this has a setting where you can delay the exposure to two seconds  
> after the mirror moves or something.  Even the little point-and-shoots  
> have that now.

A timed shutter release is not the same as mirror lock-up. Little  
point-and-shoots do not even have mirrors.

Timed release is meant to give you time to take your hands off the camera.  
To avoid vibrations from mirror slap you use mirror lock-up (typically  
implied when using live-view).


If you want to see mirror slap in action:
http://jpearman.smugmug.com/gallery/8945351_aVDzo



-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> A timed shutter release is not the same as mirror lock-up. Little 
> point-and-shoots do not even have mirrors.

I know that. I was just pointing out it's a common need, even if for 
different reasons (hands vs mirrors).

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message