Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I would tend to agree. The FP is there for a variety of applications, most of which don't seem (from my point of view, feel free to correct me) to apply to you:Paul, why remount the current R-mount lenses? As far as I can tell, the need for the FP would be for using DSLR lenses such as the TSE24 and/or getting faster shutter speeds.
I find that I have never wanted for faster shutter speeds, especially with the base ISO of 35 on the IQ180. So on the current R-mount lenses, aren't you just adding weight, bulk, and complexity, not to mention taking out the use of Rotaslide/Rotamount?
Now, if I wanted to use a Canon TSE 17 or 24, then the FP would make sense, am I missing something?
I was looking for the ability to get 1/3 and 1/2 stops with a modern style shutter. I feel the with a CCD there can be a difference if you could shoot between for example 1/15 and 1/30th. It's not as easy to push a CCD as a CMOS chip. If I was using a CMOS chip with greater DR especially in the shadows, this may not be as important.Paul, why remount the current R-mount lenses? As far as I can tell, the need for the FP would be for using DSLR lenses such as the TSE24 and/or getting faster shutter speeds.
I find that I have never wanted for faster shutter speeds, especially with the base ISO of 35 on the IQ180. So on the current R-mount lenses, aren't you just adding weight, bulk, and complexity, not to mention taking out the use of Rotaslide/Rotamount?
Now, if I wanted to use a Canon TSE 17 or 24, then the FP would make sense, am I missing something?
That's reasonable. It would accomplish this goal for you as the aperture control on the lens would remain physically fixed (and therefore by definition entirely repeatable and precise) and the shutter speed could be controlled very accurately in small steps.I was looking for the ability to get 1/3 and 1/2 stops with a modern style shutter. I feel the with a CCD there can be a difference if you could shoot between for example 1/15 and 1/30th. It's not as easy to push a CCD as a CMOS chip. If I was using a CMOS chip with greater DR especially in the shadows, this may not be as important.
Plus many of my Copal shutters are not that accurate.
Paul
Sorry Rod, you lost me - the CS shutter unit has a published max. speed of 1/250s - stopping-down obviously reduces the amount of transmitted light (all other things being equal), but how does it physically increase the top shutter speed?A comment. The Arca-Swiss shutter can fire at a rate of 1/250 in a #1 shutter and when the lens is wide open. When you stop down the time is actually much quicker than 1/250 when the aperture is closed down.
Rod
The shutter opens from a closed state, continues opening until the entire lens opening is shown, and then starts closing again. So the size of the aperture and the copal-size being covered dictates how large of an opening it has to reveal - i.e. how far it has to go before starting to reclose. You could, on every shutter speed, have the shutter open 100% and close 100%, but for an f/22 exposure you'd find that most of that motion was wasted, since after a few microseconds the shutter was opening into an area which was being blocked from seeing light by the aperture.Sorry Rod, you lost me - the CS shutter unit has a published max. speed of 1/250s - stopping-down obviously reduces the amount of transmitted light (all other things being equal), but how does it physically increase the top shutter speed?
Jim