Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/09/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Required reading on shutter designs
From: Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 22:27:37 -0700
References: <B7D574EA.7E66%dante@umich.edu>

At 11:40 PM -0400 9/24/01, dante@umich.edu wrote:
>Merits of various designs as described by a Nikon historian - interesting
>connection between the shutter travel direction and optimization
>
>http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/society/rhnc/rhnc11shut2-e.htm
>
>Even Nikon has endorsed the idea of vertical...
>
>on 9/24/01 8:20 PM, Frank Filippone at red735i@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>>  The vertical shutters travels only 2/3 the distance that horizontal shutters
>>  do..... therefore they could open and shut faster.... and give faster
>>  shutter speeds.....  That was the story when first introduced, recently...by
>>  Copal or/and Seiko.
>>
>>  The "artistic" argument of the vertical vs horiz shutter had to do with not
>>  panning a horizontally moving object... say a bicycle.... and LONG exposures
>>  makes it most obvious......with a slit shutter also is worse...
>>
>>  The original (or one of the best known at least) vertical shutters was the
>>  Zeiss Contax ... Marc, your cue......!
>>
>>  Frank Filippone
>>  red735i@earthlink.net
>>
>>  --
>>  To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

When the Copal Square shutter came out, it was untested, and 
Konishiroku was one of the few companies that had faith in it. This 
was probably due to their own work in this area with their own 
shutter, even though that wasn't particularly reliable. It took a 
while for the Copal Square to catch on, due to some limitations (lots 
of noise, not particularly light-tight) including uncertainty about 
reliablility. The Copal Square shutters were rated for about 1/5 the 
exposures that Nikon rated the then current F shutter for. Therefore 
the F3 still got the horizontal shutter. The F4 got a vertical 
shutter after Nikon had gotten some experience with vertical shutters 
in further development of their own vertical shutters in the FE, FM 
and especially the FE2 and FM2. It just took a while, and Nikon 
wasn't interested in buying a third party shutter that was available 
for other customers for their flagship camera.

Meanwhile, the Copal Square shutter had proven itself a lot more 
durable than most people initially gave it credit for, and often was 
more durable than the rest of the cameras they were installed in.

The Leica M shutters are at least an order of magnitude more durable 
than the Copal Square, and a lot more durable than almost any other 
shutter made today, in part due to its relatively slow speed and low 
stress.

The 'artistic' argument of horizontal vs. vertical shutters was 
initiated because of the old Graphic 4x5 cameras with focal plane 
shutters that took a _long_ time to travel across the aperture. With 
those you could get serious geometric distortion if shooting fast 
moving objects, but those concerns are now more historical than real.

- -- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] Required reading on shutter designs)
In reply to: Message from "dante@umich.edu" <dante@umich.edu> ([Leica] Required reading on shutter designs)