Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,694   Posts: 1,549,026   Online: 946
      
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 107
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    313
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by okto View Post
    How so? In most lenses with central shutters, the shutter is directly in front of/behind the aperture. Some even use one diaphragm for both functions.
    From an optical perspective, a lens with and without a central shutter are basically identical.

    Examples of this are large-format lenses, whose cells are routinely used in both barrels and shutters without any optical modifications at all.
    Great aperture and central shutter don't fit along well. A real world example: Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad. Lenses for F cameras get larger aperture than those for C cameras. Wonder why?

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    261
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Never liked the Contax II. The design of the camera ignores how the human hand operates. The choice of lenses is limited by the design decision to include the focusing helix in the camera body rather than in the lens. A well made but very poorly designed camera.
    Well I can understand your personal preference, but the Contax II/III was designed with engineering a reliable rangefinder so that large aperture lenses could be used accurately. Technology advanced and so your perception is skewed by what came later. The Contax is a better camera than the Leica IIIa/b/c/d, and I consider myself to be a Leicaphile

    David

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by okto View Post
    How so? In most lenses with central shutters, the shutter is directly in front of/behind the aperture. Some even use one diaphragm for both functions.
    From an optical perspective, a lens with and without a central shutter are basically identical.

    Examples of this are large-format lenses, whose cells are routinely used in both barrels and shutters without any optical modifications at all.
    I think they mean it limits the max. aperture. Did anybody make an leaf shutter SLR with a faster than f2 lens? The other thing is that many interchangeable lens SLRs of this nature had the rear elements fixed in the body behind the shutter, so really only half of the lens was interchangeable which led to compromises in lens design and ultimately a limited number of focal lengths available to the user of these cameras.

  4. #54
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by Yashinoff View Post
    I think they mean it limits the max. aperture. Did anybody make an leaf shutter SLR with a faster than f2 lens? The other thing is that many interchangeable lens SLRs of this nature had the rear elements fixed in the body behind the shutter, so really only half of the lens was interchangeable which led to compromises in lens design and ultimately a limited number of focal lengths available to the user of these cameras.
    Kowa for sure 1.9 and 1.8 and I recall a 1.4 but not sure, and I also recall Topcon with 1.8.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    280
    Another way of looking at this topic (as I sit here with my Bronica ETR/speed grip/prism/200mm lens with hood, which resembles some sort of anti-tank weapon):

    Could it be said that even a good camera can be bad for certain uses? The Bronica (in this configuration) would be a terrible camera for street photography or hiking, but it handles beautifully and produces superb negatives when I get the exposure right.
    Matt

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by PentaxBronica View Post
    Another way of looking at this topic (as I sit here with my Bronica ETR/speed grip/prism/200mm lens with hood, which resembles some sort of anti-tank weapon):

    Could it be said that even a good camera can be bad for certain uses? The Bronica (in this configuration) would be a terrible camera for street photography or hiking, but it handles beautifully and produces superb negatives when I get the exposure right.
    My Deardorff V8 sucks for action photography.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    I'm pretty sure we're talking about reliability here more than usefulness.

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Yashinoff View Post
    I'm pretty sure we're talking about reliability here more than usefulness.
    That was my assumption, too.

  9. #59
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
    Back in the 1960s, Consumer Reports magazine declared that Miranda Sensorex was the “best buy for the money.” Their declaration had a great influence on my decision to select the Sensorex as my first SLR. However, my Sensorex broke three times within the first two years of its three-year warranty. The third time it broke was when I was hundreds of feet in the air covering the maiden voyage of a new aircraft that the local university had just acquired. Thank goodness a backup twin-lens reflex camera that I carried allowed me to complete my assignment.

    The other photographers at the newspaper where I worked used Nikons and convinced me that Nikons had the reliability that I needed. I immediately replaced my broken Sensorex with a used Nikon F. I have been using Nikons ever since because I have been very impressed with the dependability and ruggedness of their bodies and lenses.

    My horrible experiences with my brand new Miranda Sensorex convinced me that it was and is a bad camera. I would not recommend it to anyone.
    Maybe in a parrell universe Miranda and Petri were the winners and Canon and Nikon are bankrupt.

  10. #60
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,662
    Quote Originally Posted by PDH View Post
    Maybe in a parrell universe Miranda and Petri were the winners and Canon and Nikon are bankrupt.
    Maybe cameras just aren't supposed to have people names.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin