A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

are mechanical shutters bad?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 30th 04, 08:54 AM
Mike Henley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?
  #2  
Old June 30th 04, 09:24 AM
ink
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?


"Mike Henley" wrote
Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?


Let me put it this way: (just my opinion)

Over the years, I've owned quite a few quartz watches (the $25 kind).
They were accurate, precise and cheap - and they're all gone, for
various reasons (broke, can't get the battery anymore etc.).

I switched to (attention: cliché!) my fathers mechanical Omega,
which is over 50 years old and works like a charm. I never worry
about batteries anymore, and back then, they made these watches
like tanks - durable, water resistant and well protected against
shocks.

I've become attached to that mechanical watch (or rather, it's
become attached to me...) and I'll gladly shell out $60 every
ten years to have it serviced. I know it's reliable (never been
late because of it).

Not so long ago, I replaced my fully electronic Nikon F65 by
an (almost) all mechanical FM2n. Never regretted it. And I
never enjoyed photography so much.

Just my 2c.

Cheers,
ink


  #3  
Old June 30th 04, 10:05 AM
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Mike Henley wrote:
Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?


Yes, electronic shutters are usually more accurate. Do you need that
accuracy? Are your light meters (and your ability to use them) up to the
task? Are you using sensitivity tested professional films (properly kept
& stored)?
In the real world that extra accuracy is usually insignificant.

Deteriotion over time: Unless you're running many rolls of film a day
through your camera, wearing your shutter out is not an issue, at least
with quality cameras. Electronic shutters will do no better (given the
same build quality).

What mechanical shutters do need is a periodic adjustment (or CLA).
This frequency this is needed depends on the shutter and how & where
it's used.
I recently had several of my cameras (20 to 50 years old, most AFAIK
never having had a CLA) checked: They were all within tollerance.

The 1/1000 top speed of older cameras is usually more like 1/800 or
1/700 (even with the glorious Leicas), but that is within tollerance.

Keep in mind that a 1$ quartz watch might not last you very long and
that your great-grandchilden will still be using the Rolex. And there's
nothing worse than ugently needing to know the time and seeing that the
bloody watch has stopped...

Chris


  #4  
Old June 30th 04, 12:10 PM
Bob Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?


"Mike Henley" wrote in message
om...
Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?

Shutter acuracy is prolly the least important part of the whole chain. Real
film speed is seldom as stated; f stop is purely mathamatical, subtract 4%
or less for every surface, transmission is seldom the same corner to corner,
or for every f stop, or target speed for that film, or reciprocity failure.
And on and on. If the shutter is deadly accurate, so what? Beside, when's
the last time two watches agreed? Bob
Hickey www.Pbase.com/bobhichey/galleries


  #5  
Old June 30th 04, 12:19 PM
Joseph Meehan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Mike Henley wrote:
Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex


That may be true, but does it need to be?

and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.


So are electronic shutters as they also have mechanical parts. In
addition the batteries may not be available in years to come.


I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?


It all depends on what you need and want.

Both mechanical and electronic work. Both can be as accurate as needed.
Both can fail. When building a new camera today, good mechanical will be
more expensive to build than good electronic. So choose what you like, but
don't expect much in the line of new mechanical to be coming out.

--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



  #6  
Old June 30th 04, 12:50 PM
Nick Zentena
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Bob Hickey wrote:

Shutter acuracy is prolly the least important part of the whole chain. Real
film speed is seldom as stated; f stop is purely mathamatical, subtract 4%
or less for every surface, transmission is seldom the same corner to corner,
or for every f stop, or target speed for that film, or reciprocity failure.
And on and on. If the shutter is deadly accurate, so what? Beside, when's
the last time two watches agreed? Bob
Hickey www.Pbase.com/bobhichey/galleries



I've seen shutters that the marked 1 second was closer to 8 seconds. So
things can get pretty bad. OTOH I think for most things the issue is how big
a difference really doesn't matter. 1/500 could be 1/400 to 1/600 and the
difference is just a fraction of a stop. If the shutter is constant then
it's not too hard to adjust the other parts of the chain [Your EI for one]
to compensate.

Nick
  #7  
Old June 30th 04, 07:25 PM
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Mike Henley writes:

Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex ...


He's right. A mechanical Rolex is off by about six seconds a day. A $1
quartz watch may be ten times more accurate. A radio-controlled quartz
watch will be accurate to within one second over a period of three
million years, and such watches only cost about $40.

... and likewise he argues that electronic shutters are more
accurate than mechanical ones ...


True. But shutter accuracy isn't as important as watch accuracy,
because imprecision in shutters isn't cumulative, and fairly large
errors are still imperceptible in the final result.

... mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade ...


This is true for all shutters. Even "electronic" shutters are actually
mechanical; they just have an electronic timing circuit that decides
when to open and close the shutter. So electronic shutters have more
accurate exposure times, but they wear out just as fast as
all-mechanical shutters.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?


A good mechanical shutter will be very accurate for many years, and
typically they can be adjusted to restore accuracy for many additional
years of service. Not only that, but you don't really need 0.001-stop
accuracy in a shutter, because exposure is never that precisely
calculated in the first place (all exposure settings are compromises).

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
  #8  
Old June 30th 04, 07:57 PM
Richard Cochran
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

(Mike Henley) wrote in message . com...
Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
be troubled in old cameras.

I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?


A quartz/LCD watch can be made with almost no moving mechanical parts,
and yes, there are certain advantages to getting rid of those moving
mechanical parts. Even a quartz controlled watch with an analog dial
doesn't need high precision mechanical parts, but can make do with
much lower quality parts than a fully mechanical watch would need.
But a quartz controlled shutter still needs lots of high precision
moving parts in its mechanisms. The curtains must still be able to
travel across the film gate with precisely controlled motion.

Quartz controlled shutters generally do a better job of precisely timing
really long exposures, which is one reason you rarely see a mechanical
shutter with a timed speed longer than one second. But for more typical
exposure times around 1/30 to 1/1000, the mechanical precision of the
shutter curtain mechanism is more important than whether the second
curtain motion is started via a mechanical or electronic trigger. The
springs and curtains of a quartz controlled shutter are no more immune
to problems than the springs and curtains of a fully mechanical shutter.
ALL camera shutters are mechanical devices that deteriorate over time
and have potential for mechanical problems.

--Rich
  #9  
Old July 1st 04, 01:05 AM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?

Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Henley writes:


Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex ...



He's right. A mechanical Rolex is off by about six seconds a day. A $1
quartz watch may be ten times more accurate. A radio-controlled quartz
watch will be accurate to within one second over a period of three
million years, and such watches only cost about $40.


... and likewise he argues that electronic shutters are more
accurate than mechanical ones ...



True. But shutter accuracy isn't as important as watch accuracy,
because imprecision in shutters isn't cumulative, and fairly large
errors are still imperceptible in the final result.


... mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
professionally checked every decade ...



This is true for all shutters. Even "electronic" shutters are actually
mechanical; they just have an electronic timing circuit that decides
when to open and close the shutter. So electronic shutters have more
accurate exposure times, but they wear out just as fast as
all-mechanical shutters.


I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?



A good mechanical shutter will be very accurate for many years, and
typically they can be adjusted to restore accuracy for many additional
years of service. Not only that, but you don't really need 0.001-stop
accuracy in a shutter, because exposure is never that precisely
calculated in the first place (all exposure settings are compromises).


Excellent post.


--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

  #10  
Old July 1st 04, 06:01 AM
William Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are mechanical shutters bad?


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Mike Henley writes:

Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex ...


He's right. A mechanical Rolex is off by about six seconds a day. A $1
quartz watch may be ten times more accurate. A radio-controlled quartz
watch will be accurate to within one second over a period of three
million years, and such watches only cost about $40.


And, if you save your sales slip & warrantee, and you find that it's off by
more than a second after three million years, you will be able to get your
$40 back.......


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
zone system test with filter on lens? Phil Lamerton In The Darkroom 35 June 4th 04 02:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.