dougpeterson
Workshop Member
The strange idea here is that focal plane shutters cause more vibrations than leaf shutters?
quotes from me on those threads:
I have 8000+ posts between here and LL and it's not as easy as you'd think to search for posts only from you. But the above quotes I found in a few minutes of searching are pretty clear.
The point being that it's not new for me to point out that focal plane shutters cause more vibration than leaf shutters and that, in some cases this can be problematic for image quality.
I get that I'm biased so everything I say will be scrutinized extra carefully, but this is really not a controversial statement. In fact Christopher mentioned it earlier in this very thread.
Notably, in many cases you can now (as of the last couple years) use sensor-based shutter (“ES”) on systems that normally use a focal plane shutter. In other cases you can use the leaf shutter rather than the focal plane shutter, when the camera/lens combo allows. So having a FPS does not always mean you must use it; obviously when it’s not in use it does not cause any vibration.
This is neither here, nor there, but the larger organizations we work with are, by far, the most technically challenging to satisfy.
For example, we made a custom film scanning rig for the Library of Congress FSA collection. There were several pages of very dense technical specifications along with specific testing methodology that would be used to evaluate them (plus another several dozen pages worth of vanilla government contract wording; don't get me started on that). Even at initial delivery I'm very confident saying we had delivered the best performing film scanner (at least within their use case). But we had to revise/improve the system twice (over the course of many months of R+D and testing) to pass every one of their tests.
Individuals often ask about sharpness, and want to see raw files, and do their own tests (these are very valid ways to test a camera and we are very glad to oblige). Large institutions usually want to systematically benchmark performance through a series of methodologically rigorous tests such as those outlined in the FADGI guidelines. That too is a valid (though very different) way of testing gear and we are also glad to oblige it.
I may have responded with less than full generosity to Gerald. He has directly insulted me several times in this thread. But I choose to be here and given that choice it's my job to take that kind of direct and personal abuse on the chin. He indeed had some valid points which I feel I've now addressed and incorporated into my response.
In retrospect I think I was also needlessly dismissive of Narikin, and (assuming you'r reading) I apologize to you, Narikin for that.
I appreciate you calling me out on it; though, I do not think it's a consistent trend ("default position") you seem to. In general I think I respond quickly to corrections or requests for clarification. That's my goal in the very least. I acknowledge I respond to corrections and requests for clarifications far more readily when they come packaged as something other than a personal attack, which is a human failing of mine.
I do find it rather annoying when I'm given zero benefit of the doubt and instead someone jumps immediately to a "you're a dirty rotten liar" but I need to learn to suck it up, move on, and see if there is any factually accurate point underlying that fairly awful veneer.
This is certainly not how DT operates.
Can you be specific: have you had this experience with DT? If you have please let me know when so I can look into the details to see if we can learn any lessons and do better in the future. If you have not had this experience with DT I would appreciate you clarifying it so we are not painted in that broad brush.
Last edited:
