I think I've figured it out. As far as I can tell, every lens will just nudge the follower slightly. I had misunderstood, thinking that the feeler communicated an absolute aperture value to the camera, but it doesn't; it communicates a value relative to the starting point, the maximum value. So when you turn the ring, the camera doesn't know (and doesn't need to know) that you're going to close down to 4 from 1.8, it just knows that you're closing down roughly 2.3 stops. What changes from lens to lens appears to be the position of the aperture ring relative to the mount. I'm probably not phrasing that well, but if you look at different lenses with different maximum apertures you can see that a different f number sits directly above the flange edge when fully open, but the ridge starts at the same point relative to the flange. Pics are of my slowest and fastest to make the difference more visible.I'd like to get an EM some day; let us know if you find out.
The camera only knows if the lens is wide open or not. It does not matter how fast the lens is. The aperture numbers are for operator confidence so the operator can control the depth of field. The camera meters light and sets a shutter speed to give a preprogrammed correct exposure. All that matters is how much light is reaching the sensor. As you turn the aperture ring from wide open toward fully stopped down the follower changes the voltage/current to the meter.I'm trying to understand how the camera/meter is able to distinguish between lenses that would leave the aperture indicator ring in exactly the same place
But would it be able to meter accurately?
I promise I'm not trying to be obtuse--I'm told it just comes naturally. If I'm understanding how the coupling ridge works, a 1.4 or 1.2 would not come around enough to make contact with the follower when fully open, and I assume would just touch it when set to 1.8, leading the camera to think 1.8 for all three. The lens wouldn't let it close the aperture down to 1.8, but if the meter calculates shutter speed for 1.8 and then actually gets 1.2, would the picture be over exposed? Or if it works differently, then if I set the lens at 1.8 but haven't moved the follower the meter thinks I'm shooting fully open, and when the picture is taken the aperture closes down to 1.8, underexposing the picture. I think.
Somewhere in that meandering though process I probably reveal where I'm confused about how it works!
The resistance is linear with the number of stops. For every stop it changes the same amount of resistance.Apertures are logarithmic, not linear. The aperture ring in the camera is a rheostat or variable resistor whose resistance matches the logarithmic progression of an aperture therefore the mechanical change between f1.2 and f2 is very minor and one may need a caliper to measure it.
Actually, the EM, FA, F4, and a few others do need to know the speed of the lens, hence the need for the "speed post" on AI lenses.
Description in detail here:
http://www.throughthefmount.com/articles_back_difference_aid_ai.html
I agree with the original poster that there should be some discernible mechanical difference when an f/1.2 is mounted vs. an f/1.8 lens -- although that difference might not be apparent just by mounting the lens: perhaps the shutter needs to be tripped to observe the interaction of the body with the lens components. If I had an EM, I would be able to experiment with this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?