What was the best decade for 35mm cameras?

[Vilk]

Not true. I just tried my D300s in Aperture Priority mode, and the shutter speeds change in 1/3-stop steps, not continuously.

how could you test whether it sets speeds in the A mode (quasi) continuously and only displays the nearest "step"?

ps. to answer the original question, the seventies, of course! i can sure set speeds continuously on my F2s

 

[Leigh B]

how could you test whether it sets speeds in the A mode (quasi) continuously and only displays the nearest "step"?

Because that's how the manual says it works.

As always, RTFM (Read The Fine Manual).

- Leigh

 

[lxdude]

The only option you have in action shooting is the in camera meter.

In some situations. Depends on the lighting conditions.

Shooting a pan with a motor drive going from deep shade into bright light is a waste of film with a mechanical camera.

Shooting a series of shots while panning from dark to light is one situation where AE can outdo manual, if scene reflectance is fairly consistent. It's a specific situation, not enough to justify the broad statement you made. AE in those kinds of situations is a useful tool to someone who already knows what they're doing. Before AE, photographers figured out other ways to get the shot.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with your original pronouncements about the ability of mechanical shutters to provide proper exposure with slide film.

Put a circular polarizer on a lens, give it a spin, what value do you use for a hand held meter?

Easy to find out. Use the manufacturer recommended compensation factor, or better yet, do some tests and be certain of exactly what it is. Then use that factor.
BTW, put a linear polarizer on a lot of electronic cameras, and the meter's useless. Along with the autofocus if it has it.

The mechanical cameras don't have stepless speeds.Electronic shutter controlled cameras do.

Many electronic cameras, the F3 for instance, only have whole-stop manual speeds. There is no in-between setting as there is with the all-mechanical F2. Auto with the exposure hold button or the exposure compensation dial can be used to manually override the Auto setting and obtain an in-between setting. Not that you'll know what it is precisely.

Shoot enough macro and you'll see another problem, you don't have much choice but to set shutter after choosing an aperture setting, you can not go back and change aperture to achieve correct exposure, you are stuck with what can be done with shutter speeds.

Why not? I don't get this statement at all, and I've shot a lot of macro.
One place where it is very useful to be able to obtain in-between settings quickly is with a mirror lens. It's quicker than using ND filters. I use the exposure hold button or compensation dial on my F3 to obtain those as needed, or the compensation dial on my Pentax LX or ME Super, which lack an exposure hold button. Just so you know I'm not saying electronic shutters are without their merits.

Electronic shutter control was the best thing to happen to cameras, it was developed to address the exposure errors.

It provides a higher degree of adherence to nominal speed and residual inaccuracy tends to be more consistent. But mechanical shutters have provided speeds accurate enough to produce excellent results, even in cameras decades old. I used my first SLR when it was brand new to shoot some of the first batch of K25 and K64 in 1974. I used the old worn, long-retired camera and lenses to shoot some of the last batch of K64 last December. The results were perfectly exposed. No CLA, ever. Just new foam seals and about 40 dry shots to loosen up the old lube.

 

[lxdude]

And what's this about "circular" polarizers? They don't have to be circular type, you know.
- Leigh

Well, they're usually circular in shape, aren't they?

 

[lxdude]

If you want to spend all day screwing around with hand held meters, 35mm isn't for you.

35mm cameras predated TTL meters by decades.
No need to screw around all day. No need to take a reading if the light hasn't changed. I have often determined my camera settings by experience. That is, I know what the exposure should be for conditions. My first Nikon was an F2 with plain prism, because I disliked the bulk and poorer balance of the F2 with Photomic head. I metered separately when needed, surprisingly seldom.

The exposure guidelines provided in the package actually worked pretty well, too. If someone followed that closely their number of well exposed images was likely to be higher than if they slavishly followed the meter, which can produce really bad results with some subjects.

The whole idea is for a fast operating system.

No, it's not. Size and weight are more important for me, and I'm hardly alone in that.

The hassy analogy is bad one, a studio with controlled lighting is obviously going to provide predictable lighting and the Blad has a polaroid back that is used to check exposure...if it needs more light you give it more light and so on.

What makes you think Hasselblads (and, you are apparently implying, other medium format cameras) are only used in studios?
But if you want another example, how about large format cameras? I'd say most field cameras are not purchased to be used primarily in a studio setting (the word 'field' in the name sort of implies that). Most LF lenses have mechanical shutters, and a lot of color transparency film has been exposed through the lenses of field cameras, with beautiful results.

Oh I've learned plenty, people are like sheep.

OK, but that doesn't change the fact that your assertion that "A mechanical camera will almost never expose slide film correctly" is ludicrous.

 

[lxdude]

I'm not talking about the accuracy of the speed, I'm talking about the speed itself.There is not a manual camera ever made that can be set to 1/93 th of a second if you need it, electronic shutters are stepless.

Why would you need to tell a camera to set 1/93rd? That kind of exactitude is illusory, anyway. Are you setting exposures like 1/93rd@f/5.21? If you are, are you really getting them? Electronically controlled cameras are mechanisms, and subject to mechanical variation and tolerances. The slit width must still be varied to compensate for acceleration as it crosses the image area. Shutter and diaphragm mechanisms are only so accurate, regardless of how they're controlled.

Besides, regarding your second sentence, if an electronic camera can happen to set the shutter at 1/93rd, so can an F2 (stepless from 1/80th to 1/2000th).

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

You only have a choice of fixed shutter speeds with a mechanical camera. If you need an in between speed you are SOL.The F2 can be set inbetween but you have no way of knowing what the speed it.

My F2, Leicaflexes and M6 can all be set at intermediate speeds through most of their range. I can guess very closely what the intermediate speed really is (when my slides are badly exposed, it's only due to a bad decisions of mine, not the camera's).
Yes, they are mechanical.
Yes, they are accurate.

Those speeds are probably much more accurate than the effective diaphragm accuracy on a lens which would be likely to accompany an all-electronic wonder.

 

[Diapositivo]

Electronic shutters certainly have advantages in some situations.

My Minolta X-700 in Auto mode measures exposure after the diaphragm is closed and before the shutter opens. That compensates for the hopefully small aperture deviance from the theoretical value*. Electronic controlled shutters remain precise "longer" while mechanical shutters suffer from bad lubrication, or lack thereof, or excess cold, or maybe excess heat. In certain situations, such as using mirror lenses or needing the last bit of DoF (full closure), a better "granularity" is desirable.

Trouble is: most of the time if you have the time to use incident metering you get better exposures than when you use in-camera metering and auto mode. When using incident metering, one just puts the camera in Manual mode and sets shutters speeds manually and often also in electronically controlled shutters one only has full stops. The user manual of my X-700 explicitly forbids setting half-values on the shutter dial.

Many persons ignore that in most cases diaphragm settings can be intermediate between clicks, they don't have to coincide with ring clicks. In most situations, one recovers that 0.3 EV with this trick if utter precision is needed (and if the original measure was utterly "precise" in the first place).

Overall, though, I've used slides with mechanical cameras a lot, and without problems. Electronic shutters can be "better" but not "noticeably better". Mechanical shutters, when properly serviced and checked, really are good enough.

I perfectly understand that for some precision work where absolute "uniformity of density" between shots is desirable (let's say some catalogue work, or some scientific work) the elimination of that 1/6 of EV or so of mistake that a mechanically controlled shutter can introduce can be useful. In most situations, it would not be relevant.

Overall, although I understand the preference for electronic shutters, I do agree that fstop affirmation was a bit of an exaggeration. That would never make me feel authorized to answer to his point in an aggressive manner. We are all friends and colleagues here. Let's avoid "confrontational" attitudes. It's not so important who is right and who is wrong, on any matter. Important is to exchange opinions in a friendly way.

* This really is a demonstration of the ingenuity of Minolta designers: having a continously-variably shutter speed set with a measurement obtained after the diaphragm is closed compensates with any imprecision both of shutter speed and real aperture. The only remaining deviance from theoretical wanted exposure is the film ISO deviance from the theoretical value. The X-700 reaches the same theoretical precision of real-time (such as the one of the Olympus OM-2) exposure with probably a lesser cost.

 

[lxdude]

Electronic shutters certainly have advantages in some situations.
Electronic controlled shutters remain precise "longer" while mechanical shutters suffer from bad lubrication, or lack thereof, or excess cold, or maybe excess heat.

I don't agree completely with this. Shutters in some electronic cameras check themselves and adjust for wear, maintaining accuracy, and that's all for the good. But either type of shutter can suffer from bad lubrication or lack of lubrication, and certainly electronically controlled shutters are more susceptible to cold because their batteries are susceptible to cold. Mechanical cameras have functioned well in extreme conditions like climbing expeditions or months in Antarctica (or on the moon). Some photographers spend months in very cold, remote places to get the images they want, and still use mechanical film cameras because no batteries are needed for them to function.

 

[erikg]

Well, they're usually circular in shape, aren't they?

Some are squares, but they don't get out much.

 

[Diapositivo]

I don't agree completely with this. Shutters in some electronic cameras check themselves and adjust for wear, maintaining accuracy, and that's all for the good. But either type of shutter can suffer from bad lubrication or lack of lubrication, and certainly electronically controlled shutters are more susceptible to cold because their batteries are susceptible to cold. Mechanical cameras have functioned well in extreme conditions like climbing expeditions or months in Antarctica (or on the moon). Some photographers spend months in very cold, remote places to get the images they want, and still use mechanical film cameras because no batteries are needed for them to function.

I partially agree. With electronic control the entire "control" part does not need lubrication, but a problem may arise in the parts that move the cloth or blades, so electronic shutters are less dependent from lubrication, but not exempt from it (the more lubrication points, the more probabilities of something needing lubrication, it's not only yes or no).

Yes mechanical cameras can work in extreme cold or hot whether but, as far as I know, a "delubrication" is necessary. Cameras which were brought on high mountain expeditions (Himalaya, 8000m, that extreme level), were deprived of lubricants (lubricants prevents wear, basically, and in those circumstances wear is not important) because otherwise they would have had trouble working. That said, oftentimes it's "delubricated" mechanical cameras which were used, and not electronic ones, until recently.

(I recently saw a film on the first successful Nanga Parbat ascension*, the one in which Günther Messner lost his life and Rheinold Messner almost died as well. At the very end a Canon Ftb is shown as taking a self-timer picture on top of the Nanga Parbat. It's mechanical, but I found absurd that such an heavy camera would be brought up there. Every gram counts. Would like to have confirmations**).

Regarding cold, one can keep a spare battery in the pocket (and change it every now and then) or can have a battery unit in the pocket connected with wires to the camera. Clumsy but functional. Any electrician can prepare that. Some producers (Nikon, Contax) even had them in catalogue.

If I had to go skiing, and with a camera, I would prefer a mechanical camera because the fuss of the external battery is not compensated by the slight shutter imprecision. I do believe, though, that the mechanical camera would actually show some imprecision in shutter speeds. Precision gear are sensitive to temperature change. The question is always if "good enough" is enough. To me it is.

* I checked, it was the first successful ascension through the Rupal face, the third ascension that far.

** Another thing shown in the film is the use of Leica cameras which looked to be III type. The ascension was made in the Seventies. The camera had no recharge lever, it were recharged with a knob which makes me think they were III. They were probably chosen for weight reasons.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

Everest, 1963

The '63 American Everest expedition members (19) were all given Nikon Fs that had been de-lubricated as well as a selection of lenses. If you've got the yellow wall of Nat. Geos in your basement or garage you could find the issue. Every camera I recall seeing in that magazine's story had the plain prism, and they were probably shooting Kodachrome.

By the way, I once met Oswald Olz, who summited on Messner's no-oxygen ascent of Everest in the 70s. He (Olz) took summit pictures with, I think, a Nikkormat FTn and a 43-86 zoom. He really liked that lens.

 

[lxdude]

I partially agree. With electronic control the entire "control" part does not need lubrication, but a problem may arise in the parts that move the cloth or blades, so electronic shutters are less dependent from lubrication, but not exempt from it (the more lubrication points, the more probabilities of something needing lubrication, it's not only yes or no).

Yes mechanical cameras can work in extreme cold or hot whether but, as far as I know, a "delubrication" is necessary. Cameras which were brought on high mountain expeditions (Himalaya, 8000m, that extreme level), were deprived of lubricants (lubricants prevents wear, basically, and in those circumstances wear is not important) because otherwise they would have had trouble working. That said, oftentimes it's "delubricated" mechanical cameras which were used, and not electronic ones, until recently.

I recall that cameras were often "winterized" by removing lubricants. From what I understand, later on better lubes made it less important to do it except for really cold conditions, or lighter lubes could be used instead of running the mechanisms dry. One of the American photo magazines claimed that a slow running shutter in the cold would compensate for film's loss of speed in the cold. I have no idea if that is correct.
I remember one of Fuji's selling points for their ST801 camera was its "Self-lubricating sintered bronze shutter bearings", which never needed to be relubricated, and which would work in temperature extremes. They advertised that the ST801 had been the camera of choice for the 1972 (I think) Japanese Everest expedition, and the cameras had not had their lubricants removed, and worked properly. If the lens lube was not replaced, I imagine the focusing was really stiff!
I used my ST801 at temperatures well below freezing without incident, but not living in Minnesota or someplace like that my camera never really got put to the test.

I have used the remote battery adapter in cold weather with my Pentax LX, but it gets in my way and I find I prefer just using my MX.

 

[Vilk]

Because that's how the manual says it works.

As always, RTFM (Read The Fine Manual).

- Leigh

a fine mighty answer--but not to my question

manuals for F3, F4, F5, F6--probably all nikon film cameras anyway--have always said "stepless" when shutter speed was being changed automatically; steps for manual adjustments were still shown as per your example. hence my question: in absence of any information--how could you test? (outside of the bench, of course)

 

[fstop]

Typical forum garbage, just because you guys don't agree with something someone says does not grant license for the snide remarks and insults. I'm not wasting my time dragging out test equipment and video cam to illustrate what I'm talking about.
You can waste your time posting what ever you want, you will never change mind on this or my methods to making images.

 

[Diapositivo]

Certain, or all, SLR Contax lenses had the helicoids (how do you say? well the opposing "threads") made in teflon which, IIRC, did not need lubrication at all and was much less prone to problems in very hot or very cold whether.

I also read about some kind of special lubrication for very low temperatures. Recently I read about some high mountain expedition using electronic cameras, I was very surprised especially considering the cold battery problem. I have no recollection of where, when, why, I just remember being surprised for the kind of camera.

 

[Leigh B]

Many persons ignore that in most cases diaphragm settings can be intermediate between clicks, they don't have to coincide with ring clicks. In most situations, one recovers that 0.3 EV with this trick if utter precision is needed (and if the original measure was utterly "precise" in the first place).

Modern Copal shutters (for LF camera lenses) have two short lines between each full f/stop line.

This allows you to easily set 1/3, 1/2, and 2/3 increments between any calibrated stops.

There are no click (detented) stops; the adjustment is smooth and continuous.

- Leigh

 

[Leigh B]

Some photographers spend months in very cold, remote places to get the images they want, and still use mechanical film cameras because no batteries are needed for them to function.

Yep. My wife took the F2 to Antarctica and it performed flawlessly.

- Leigh

 

[Leigh B]

manuals for F3, F4, F5, F6--probably all nikon film cameras anyway--have always said "stepless" when shutter speed was being changed automatically;

Nikon makes two different series of cameras, the pro series and the consumer series.

It's quite possible that the pro series cameras do have infinitely-variable shutter speeds.

The manuals I quoted above are in the consumer series, and have no such "stepless" statement. My response was to the statement that "all" Nikon electronic shutters were stepless, which is obviously incorrect.

Whether or not a particular camera has stepless shutter speeds is an engineering and marketing decision, having to do with how the control algorithm and circuitry are designed. These decisions impact production cost and final selling price.

If a camera has this feature it would certainly be mentioned in the manual and the marketing literature, since it would be deemed a positive selling point.

Therefore, if it's not mentioned in the manual, it's not in the camera.

- Leigh

 

[Leigh B]

Certain, or all, SLR Contax lenses had the helicoids (how do you say? well the opposing "threads") made in teflon which, IIRC, did not need lubrication at all and was much less prone to problems in very hot or very cold whether.

Teflon would be an excellent choice for a focusing helicoid. Only one of the threaded parts would be made of that material (looks like white plastic); the other would be made of aluminum.

The concerns from a production standpoint are that it's somewhat difficult to work, and quite expensive. But it would work very well in this application.

- Leigh

 

[Chan Tran]

I don't want to make the matter worse than it already is but after readings your posts here is my 2 cents.
1. I actually prefer stepped operation of the shutter speed and aperture even in automatic mode. I like the camera to do what it says it does and not a different value.
2. The Nikon F3 in specific does stepless shutter speed when it's in automatic operation. Both the manual and my shutter speed tester confirm this. I work on this camera quite often.
3. The Nikon F5 which the shutter is very close to modern DLSR also does stepless shutter speed in automode. Also both the specs/manual and my test confirm this.
4. I am a pure APUGER so I do not own any digital camera so I don't know much about the D300s. Reading the manual it only mentions stepped operation (didn't say that if in automatic it's stepless). But to test this is actually easy. Since the D300s can have shutter speed down to 30s. Select a fair dark scene, low ISO, a small aperture so that the shutter speed is in the range of 15s to 30s. Varying the light by a small amount and time the actual exposure time with a stopwatch of just a second hand of a watch. Although the readout would jump from 15, 20, 25 to 30. If you can get intermediate actual exposure time then it's stepless otherwise it's in steps.
5. Battery isn't much of an issue for electronic camera. One can get powerful exeternal battery that won't die in the cold.
6. Electronically controlled shutter is superior in acurracy with slower shutter speed (1/60 and slower) but with high shutter speed the shutter curtain travel time and evenness influences the accuracy of the shutter speed a lot more. Even with modern cameras, the shutter is still a spring operated device and electronic control doesn't do much in the speed range of 1/1000 and above.

 

[cooltouch]

Typical forum garbage, just because you guys don't agree with something someone says does not grant license for the snide remarks and insults. I'm not wasting my time dragging out test equipment and video cam to illustrate what I'm talking about.
You can waste your time posting what ever you want, you will never change mind on this or my methods to making images.

I've been following this thread from the beginning and I don't recall any obvious snide remarks or insults. Maybe a couple that could be construed that way if someone is being overly sensitive. But by and large there have been no blatant ad hominem attacks. The folks here have been arguing to the point, and not to the 'man.' And since the point was your rather outlandish claim, then it is expected that you defend it in a sensible way.

As for wasting time, it hasn't been a waste of time for me because I've just learned something. I've learned that the Nikon F2 has stepless shutter speeds. LXDude claimed stepless speeds from 1/80th to 1/2000th. It puzzles me, though, why Nikon did this. I mean, they offered the Nikon DS-1 and DS-2 EE aperture control units for the F2, which turned certain versions of it into shutter priority cameras. But they've never offered any sort of add-on device to turn it into an aperture-priority one (where stepless shutter speeds might make some sense) that I know of. Really, I didn't know it was possible to have stepless shutter speeds with a mechanical camera.

Anyway, this was news to me. So, forgetting that LXDude wrote that 1/80-1/2000 was the operating range, I grabbed my F2 and set it between 1 second and 1/2 second. And guess what? The time the shutter stayed open was somewhere between 1 second and 1/2 second. I even repeated it several times, doing the old musician's one-ee-and-uh two-ee-and-uh count in my head so I could mentally divide one second into quarters. Counting it off, it sure was close to 3/4 of a second. So, maybe the F2's speeds are stepless further than people may have thought.

I just made another interesting discovery -- My original (mechanical) Canon F-1 does the same thing. Fascinating . . .

 

[Les Sarile]

Nikon makes two different series of cameras, the pro series and the consumer series.

It's quite possible that the pro series cameras do have infinitely-variable shutter speeds.

The manuals I quoted above are in the consumer series, and have no such "stepless" statement. My response was to the statement that "all" Nikon electronic shutters were stepless, which is obviously incorrect.

If a camera has this feature it would certainly be mentioned in the manual and the marketing literature, since it would be deemed a positive selling point.

Therefore, if it's not mentioned in the manual, it's not in the camera.
- Leigh

All Nikon SLR's with electronic shutter and aperture priority auto exposure have stepless shutter speeds and are stated n the manuals such as for the EL, FE, FE2, FA, FD, FM3A, etc.

This applies to all the electronic shutter aperture cameras I have (Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax) except for one - the Yashica FR, which didn't have aperture priority until FR1 and where the touted advantage of the electronic shutter was to have no vibration associated with pressing the shutter as it is just a switch.

 

[Pumalite]

Can't leave out 1959.-Nikon F

 

[Ralph Javins]

Good morning, fstop;

(1.) I am surprised that this thread is still running.

(2.) I have waited overnight to see if the feeling of a need to respond would diminish. It is still here.

(3.) Normally my responses are lengthy, complete, detailed, and even verbose. There is no further need for continuing that practice here.

(4.) Many other members of APUG have provided evidence and commentary that is clearly counter to your position, but you seem to be a person with remarkably strong convictions.

(5.) Your commentary about all early mechanical shutter speed regulators being incapable of being set to intermediate speeds between the marked standard speeds is a false statement. In addition to the Nikon, Canon, and other cameras others have mentioned, my Minolta SR-1b will also yield intermediate shutter speeds between the marked settings, and this capability is described in the manual also, as will the shutters of most of the other cameras in the Minolta SR Series, so it is possible to try to set a 1/93rd of a second; not easy to get it accurately, but possible. Again, your statement about the early mechanical shutters is false and is not true.

(6.) Now there is an option available to the members of APUG that I need to invoke.