I'm trying to decide where're there exists a matrix $A \in \text{Mat}(2, \mathbb{R})$ such that
$$e^A = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1\end{pmatrix} =: B$$
In particular I don't want to use the identity $\det(B) = e^{\text{trace}(A)}$. Is there another way to approach this?
We shall prove that, for any $B\in\text{Mat}_{n\times n}(\mathbb{R})$ with $\det(B)\leq 0$, the equation $\exp(A)=B$ has no solution $A\in\text{Mat}_{n\times n}(\mathbb{R})$. In particular, the matrix $B$ in question has $\det(B)=-1<0$, which fits our hypothesis.
Suppose on the contrary that $A$ exists. Let $f:[0,1]\to\text{Mat}_{n\times n}(\mathbb{R})$ be the map $$f(t):=\exp(tA)$$ for all $t\in[0,1]$. Therefore, $f$ forms a path from the identity matrix $I$ to $\exp(A)=B$. (Note that $f$ is continuous as it is differentiable: $f'(t)=A\,f(t)$ for all $t\in[0,1]$.)
Now, $g:[0,1]\to\mathbb{R}$ given by $$g(t):=\det\big(f(t)\big)$$ for each $t\in[0,1]$ is a path in $\mathbb{R}$ from $\det(I)=+1$ to $\det(B)\leq 0$. (Since $\det$ is a polynomial function, it is continuous. Therefore, a composition of $\det$ with the continuous map $f$ is another continuous map $g$.) Therefore, $0$ lies in the image of $g$. Consequently, $g(\tau)=0$ for some $\tau\in(0,1]$. Ergo, $\exp(\tau A)$ has determinant $0$, and whence noninvertible. However, we know that $\exp(-\tau A)$ is the inverse of $\exp(\tau A)$, leading to a contradiction.