Diaphragm V Focal Plane

[cliveh]

Are there any thoughts about the merits or otherwise for diaphragm shutter v focal plane. Although most of my cameras use a focal plane shutter, I prefer the idea of a diaphragm shutter, as it suggests a more Zen like function, instantaneous highlight exposure, even if the shadows have to wait for the diaphragm to be fully open for correct exposure at the end of the shutter speed. A focal plane is exposing different portions of the scene over a given time span. Am I just mad to even mention this?

 

[John Austin]

Read about simple photo mechanics, where you will find the advantages and weakness of each shutter

If you want to bring Zen into your photography learn to become engaged with your subject and use equipment and materials you know so well that their use is second nature - But I note you quote Francis Bacon, so . . .

I Digress!!

Back to shutters and a warning - In the profile pic' of me photographing a Zamia in WA I was using my Sinar Shutter as I know it well, unfortunately the lens I was using has a Compound shutter and I must of touched the shutter rlse on the Compound when stopping down the aperture, closing the Compound and resulting in two blank sheets - Hoist by my own petard

 

[Steve Smith]

instantaneous highlight exposure, even if the shadows have to wait for the diaphragm to be fully open for correct exposure at the end of the shutter speed.

So light from the shadows travels slower than the speed of light?!!

Steve.

 

[cliveh]

So light from the shadows travels slower than the speed of light?!!

Steve.

No, it just takes longer to record the correct exposure. Can you play that guitar?

 

[Steve Smith]

Can you play that guitar?

Sometimes. But I can't always hear the low notes as they travel slower than the speed of sound!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kqZj5-pOzo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WovbtsFk4MU


Steve.

 

[cliveh]

Sometimes. But I can't always hear the low notes as they travel slower than the speed of sound!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kqZj5-pOzo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WovbtsFk4MU


Steve.

Steve, I get your d/rift, but my point was more about the total time being for exposure, be it highlights or shadows, rather than time in relation to moving position (extreme example, a distorted train from focal plane shutter).

 

[ic-racer]

Different flash synch speed, varying shutter efficiency with aperture, and oblong tires of moving cars. Other than those points, not much difference.

 

[ic-racer]

No, it just takes longer to record the correct exposure.

The exposure time is the same for both the highlight and the shadow with both focal plane and leaf shutters.

 

[blansky]

As someone said, different flash sync speeds which is pretty important if you use any kind of strobes for lighting.

 

[jp498]

I appreciate both.

With a focal plane shutter, like in a speed graphic, you have to fully rewind it to view the groundglass. (and remember to cock it if you are going to shoot a second shot, otherwise, it will still work, but just at the next slowest speed). That and the lack of strobe sync is my only fault with focal plane big shutters. Sometimes, if you want 1/10-1/1000 sec range on a barrel lens, there is no substitute. (Sinar's optional shutter comes close for small lenses)

Leaf shutters give x-sync if sufficiently modern. are quieter (nice in tlrs, rangefinders), smaller. However the downside is their accuracy can vary from lens to lens depending on their CLA status. You also have to walk around front of the LF camera to see the settings and to verify open/closed. The leaf shutters for monster lenses are crude (like the wollensak studio shutters) or lack flexible timing options (packard).