The inaccuracy of fast speeds on mechanical cameras.

OP
OP

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
1,655
Location
USA from Ukraine
Format
Multi Format

No wonder I get better consistent results with electronic shutters
 
OP
OP

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
1,655
Location
USA from Ukraine
Format
Multi Format
Do the leaf shutters keep their high speeds better than focal plane?

No. Leaf shutters need CLA. What sucks about leaf shutters is the difference is inconsistent and can vary seconds
 
OP
OP

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
1,655
Location
USA from Ukraine
Format
Multi Format
My Nikon N6006 electronic shutter seems to be right on as well. Amazing for a 35 year old camera.

Same experience with my electronic shutters. especially the copals
 
OP
OP

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
1,655
Location
USA from Ukraine
Format
Multi Format

My tester has 3 diagonal sensors covering the 35 frame. So they should work regardless
 

reddesert

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
2,404
Location
SAZ
Format
Hybrid

This is called "shutter efficiency" and you have it roughly correct although perhaps could be stated the other way: testing a leaf shutter with a single-detector shutter tester, or unfocused light onto the tester, will yield the small-aperture speed, and the effective shutter speed is faster (less exposure) for wide-open apertures than for the small aperture.

Frequently when people complain about the highest speed of a leaf shutter being slow, it is clear that they don't understand this effect.
 

SalveSlog

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
270
Location
Southern Norway
Format
Medium Format
When testing fast speeds for leaf shutters with the lens wide open, I hold a small piece of cardboard in front of the lens.
 

Attachments

  • circel-aperture.jpg
    244.7 KB · Views: 30

reddesert

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
2,404
Location
SAZ
Format
Hybrid
Why? Please explain.

If one does what a lot of people do:
shine a light into the leaf shutter lens,
hold a shutter tester with a small photosensitive detector some random distance behind the lens,
read speed/time off shutter tester.

then one is testing the speed with roughly a pencil beam of light from the source to the detector, and this beam is often smaller than even the smallest taking aperture in common use, so it doesn't model the shutter efficiency at typical taking apertures correctly.

There are ways to get around this, like having the light source far away and putting the tester at roughly the focal plane of the lens, so that light is focused from the entire taking aperture onto the tester's detector. SalveSlog's approach is another way of trying to enforce use of more of the taking aperture.
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,344
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format

It's more useful to view the error is terms of f/stops using the formula:

log(actual/expected)/log 2

So, for example the 1/500 figure is off by -.32 f/stops - which isn't a big deal

After having measured dozens upon dozens of mechanical shutters, albeit it with a single sensor tester, I have yet to see one hit the top speeds with any real accuracy. HOWEVER, if the other speeds are OK (within 1/3 of a stop or so), I am reasonably sure this is mostly a measurement artifact.

But I think it's overkill to worry about it. Using a single sensor timer, a brand new Hasselblad lens will still show 1/3 to 1/2 stop slow at 1/500th. I just got a Hasselblad lens CLAed and everything measured within 0.2 stop or better but 1/500 was "off" 1/2 stop.

With large format leaf shutters, the effect is even more pronounced because you're trying to move a lot more mass. The older Ilex shutters had enough adjustments and mechanism in them that you could get both high and lower speeds reasonably close. But my newer Copals cannot hit max speed reliably at the fast settings. At least that's been my experience when comparing nearly new Copals against just-CLAed Ilex shutters.

For large format, this tends to be a non issue. It's worth noting that mechancial shutters read somewhat differently if you test them after having not been used for a while, vs. firing them a few times and then testing them.

In my view, this just isn't that important. It's largely measurement artifact at the higher speeds. Moreover, a slow shutter will give you slightly more exposure which is well within the latitude of most films and is generally far more desirable than underexposure. The one exception would be shooting 'chromes in which case I'd just bracket a half stop and call it a day.

At high speeds, the shutter is open longer in the center than at the edges. For slower speeds, this difference is negligible since it is very small compared to the overall time the shutter is open. But at higher speeds the difference between center and edge open time becomes an appreciable percentage of the short time the shutter is open.

There is probably some formal definition for speed that takes into account edge and center open times. It might even be some kind of integral formula that computes the total amount of light the film absorbs. But a sensor measuring open time in the middle of the aperture isn't going to take that into account. In theory, some of the multi-sensor measurement tools do, but I have no idea how they are taking into account center vs. edge speeds.

In any case, I think this is mostly not much of an issue in practice. Other than transparency films, modern emulsions have plenty of latitude and 1/2 stop or even 3/4 stop of actual error isn't really much of an issue.

It's worth noting that, for monochrome, that's why the whole idea of "Personal EI" came into being. You calibrate everything for your shutters, your meter, your exposure placement, your manner of agitation, your developer, and so on to come up with your effective film speed. None of this contemplated 0.1 stop resolution (Beyond The Zone System notwithstanding).

Small Editoral Note: With the advent of digital displays and cheap measurement tools, there is a disturbing trend of folks becoming obsessed with absolute accuracy with everything they use. These old mechanical devices had a fair bit of tolerance when new, and will now have even more with decades of use behind them. Expecting electronic shutter accuracy is unrealistic.

I see this all the time when I use a laser to align my old Omega D-2. I can adjust it to be "right on", move the head to a new position, and now it's off a bit again. This old stuff wasn't designed for absolute perfection (whatever that might mean). Another good example of this is that people tend to trust digital numeric displays as being more correct than a moving needle analog indicator. This trust is sometimes misplaced.
 
Last edited:

Dan Fromm

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
6,823
Format
Multi Format
SalveSlog, reddesert, I'm well acquainted with the idea of shutter efficiency, but thanks for reminding me. Reminders never hurt.

reddesert, when I test my shutters' speeds I don't use a light source that projects a "pencil beam of light." In any case, my Calumet shutter speed tester doesn't measure light transmitted while the shutter is open, it measures how long the shutter is open. It starts timing when it sees light coming through the shutter, stops timing when it no longer sees light coming through the shutter.
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,344
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format

Dan -

I have that same timer and I agree with you that it works fine. I have found that an open bulb light source very close to the front of the lens or camera, with that timer as close as possible to the film plane and centered over the middle of the frame, gives me good results. I take 3-5 readings and average the results, expressing the variation in f/stops. I have done this for dozens of shutters of all kinds and keep a spreadsheet with a tab for every shutter ever tested.

As noted in my prior post, it doesn't take into account the difference between edge speed and center speed (aka shutter efficiency). But I don't think it's much of an issue even at higher speeds. I've mostly used mine to spot gross errors to determine when a shutter is really out to lunch and needs a CLA. But I've never thought of this as being a high precision activity. No other part of my workflow from my meters to my enlarging timers are high precision
 

reddesert

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
2,404
Location
SAZ
Format
Hybrid

Dan, it's not just the size of the light source, but the limited size of the detector, that can result in the mis-accounting for shutter efficiency. This also depends on where the sensor is located, forward/at/back of the focal plane of the lens. Depending on the source and detector locations, it is possible for light from the source through the outer regions of the lens (wide aperture) to largely miss the detector, so the tester winds up only measuring the beam through the center. As you note, the design of the shutter tester and what threshold it uses to trigger on the rise/decline of the light source also matter.

This is all somewhat head-of-a-pin-dancing, since it only matters near the fastest speeds of the shutter and the fastest speeds the tester can measure. But if one is going to say that all leaf shutters are off at high speeds (which has been expressed by other posters in this thread), then one must control for these effects.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…