Hi Df Cardwell, thanks for the philosophy of shooting rangefinders tip! I suppose I should have given that MF Fuji rangefinder a bit more time to get used to when I had it...Makes me wonder if I should just go for the G2 anyway and see if I like it sometime? Suppose no one can tell me if I will, I just have to try.
This whole discussion is making me want to get an SLR with MLU, if I return to an SLR, though. Which is kind of a bummer, because I really liked the Minolta XD-11. It is a fine camera; but sadly, no MLU. Maybe the shutter and mirror assembly is sufficiently dampened that they didn't need one? One could only hope that, I guess!
Thanks for the great discussion, it feels really good to be talking cameras and things again.
I don't think so.
Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
First, because both tests include the full cycle, not just the opening part.
Second, the real 'bump' occurs when the mirror or shutter hit their end stops, their end positions. When their mass comes to a sudden stop, and the energy built-up during accelleration instantly has to find a place to go.
At that time, the image is no longer being created.
The difference between having a mirror and having no mirror is not readily quantifiable in general terms and the difference between an SLR and rangefinder in use is more about whether the particular camera model is a good match to the individual photographer and the job at hand. David Goldfarb's point about the wider parameters and greater ease of designing wide angle lenses without compensating for a mirror's physical requirements is well taken, but in practice there are good and bad wide angles among both rangefinder and SLR optics.
I have a very solid brass-bodied SLR with a cam driven mirror. With the mass of the body and the deceleration of the cam drive mirror (to the point that it really doesn't slap against the rest of the body at the top of the cycle), it does very well at pretty much any shutter speed. I have been repeatedly surprised over the 30 years that I've used it at the degree to which I can handhold at slower shutter speeds.
I have an Argus C3, an Agfa Isolette folder, and a Bessa R3A, all rangefinders. The difference in their viewfinders is more significant a difference in practice than between say the R3A and a nice SLR finder.
One other thing that I find more significant than mirror slap in the cameras I've used is whether the camera fits my hands well. I have larger hands, and even many SLR bodies aren't large enough for me to get a good grip. The Nikon N8008s body is short and thick, and the bottom of the body doesn't even reach halfway across my right palm with my finger on the release button. I don't feel that I can hold it very steadily. Bad ergonomics for me personally. I put a trigger winder on my C/V Bessa rangefinder bodies to make them fit my hands well, and they work great for me that way.
There's a lot more at play than a simple mirror/no mirror question if "sharper negs" is the goal, and in many (perhaps most) circumstances, I think that gets swamped by other considerations, including individual camera build, individual lens quality, overall ergonomics of the particular camera model in your hands, your overall comfort level with the given camera, and your individual skills/ability to hand hold steadily.
That's precisely the problem. Only the opening part is relevant to the exposure. Vibration after the shutter closes and the mirror returns (on cameras that have an instant return mirror) is irrelevant, and watching a laser point dance on the wall or seeing the penny fall is only interesting if you can isolate the beginning of the exposure from the end.
Originally Posted by Q.G.
I'd still rather look at a resolution test, because that's really what you want to know--do shutter and mirror-induced vibration reduce resolution, and how much, and at what shutter speeds?
I don't know about mirrors, but would there be any vibration caused as I yell "SAY CHEESE!!!" just as I'm releasing the shutter?
"To a photographer the world consists of an infinite number of vantage points -- places to stand -- of which very few are altogether satisfactory." (John Szarkowski, Atget
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I prefer working from rangefinder negatives, over the years , it just seemed to me the prints are sharper than those from an SLR camera.
The Pentax 6x7 was the fashion photographers go to camera, I believe because the mirror slap softened the look of skin.
I own a fuji 6x9, my wife received a Pentax 67, I like both cameras but use mirror lockup with the Pentax on tripod.
...and one can also see what the lens does NOT see! One of the great things about my Leica is that I can see what is about to enter the camera's field of view before it happens. With an SLR, you only see what the lens sees, and miss what is just outside its field of view. With a RF, you can see something about to happen and recompose to catch it.
Originally Posted by df cardwell
I never found this to be a problem because I am able to open my eyes and see without looking through a view finder. Some times I will keep both eyes open when I use an RF or an SLR. Neither of these two techniques are difficult, in fact most people normally see the first way! So I always though the discussion about what one cannot be seen in an SLR versus a RF camera to be just plain rationalization for the RF users to feel superior. For the life of me, I can't see why the RF users are so insecure that they need the rationalization.
Originally Posted by eddym
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
Using a laser pointer does tell you one thing: is the camera moving, or not? Whether or not it affects the image depends on something else: How long does the vibration continue?. This will depend on the ability of the tripod/head to dampen.
It's not enough to know if the camera is moving or even how long the vibrations continue, unless you can isolate the vibrations that happen at the beginning of the exposure from the vibrations that happen after the shutter closes and the mirror returns. You could approximate this by triggering the shutter on "B," but given the way a focal plane shutter works, with the second curtain beginning to close before the first curtain ends its travel at any speed faster than the X-sync speed, that test wouldn't necessarily give you everything you need to know.
Another approach might be to look at a sound wave to see which part of the shutter and mirror motion produce the most sound, sound being vibration, but even this information isn't that useful. I tried this with my notoriously loud Bronica S2a and determined that most of the sound was happening at the end of the exposure, rather than at the beginning where it could reduce image quality, but it's hard to say what that means, since it also depends on the structure of the camera and where the vibrations are coming from and the length of the exposure and external factors like the tripod and head.