Actually, this makes sense...In physical terms, the movement of a leaf-shutter exerts an equal force over 360 degrees on a flat plane whereas a focal-plane shutter does a 180 degree movement on that flat plane; thus there must be some transfer of movement in the opposite direction.
Originally Posted by Woolliscroft
...And so his education in all things photographic continues!!!
Max Power, he's the man who's name you'd love to touch! But you mustn't touch! His name sounds good in your ear, but when you say it, you mustn't fear! 'Cause his name can be said by anyone!
X sync means simply that the flash contacts close and trip the strobe when the shutter reaches it's maximum opening. F sync. works a bit differently.
The flash bulb does not excite or reach it's point of maximum illumination instantly, it must begin receiving current 20 milli seconds before the shutter
reaches it's maximum opening to be able to deliver the greatest amount of light through the wide open shutter. There is no delay in X sync. when the
shutter reaches its widest opening and before it begins to close the strobe dumps the capacitor stored energy to the tube.
Have a good day.
Some more points for (and against) leaf shutters:
They're cheaper than focal plane shutters. Fixed lens cameras almost always have leaf shutters. But with interchangable lenses, it's cheaper to build one shutter, in the body, than one in every lens. That's why there are so few interchangable lens leaf shutters in 35mm, and those there are almost all have the leaf shutter and rear elements fixed to the body, only the front elements interchange, limiting lens design freedom immensely. It's also a pain to build the mechanical linkage allowing the body to cock the lens.
Bigger than 35mm the expense, physical shock and sync limitations of focal plane shutters are much magnified, so there are many interchangable-lens leaf-shutter systems.
They require much less force/time to cock. Leaf shutters have for decades been used in MF SLRs where the shutter is open for viewing, closes when the button is pressed, reopened for exposure after the mirror is up, closed after exposure, and then opened again for viewing after the mirror is back down. FP shutters don't need to do this on an analog camera because they're behind the mirror, which is good, because they can't be re-cocked quickly enough.
The problem arises on digital cameras where one wants continuous viewing on the LCD monitor. None of the FP-shuttered digitals (all the interchangable lens ones) can use the LCD as a viewfinder--thus, ironically, this useful feature is found on even the cheapest digicams, but it's missing on the expensive ones.
The cocking force issue also led to a special breed of leaf shutter: the Press shutter. These shutters are cocked just before use by the force of triggering them.
Against them, it seems they are much more prone to needing a CLA once or twice during their life; FP shutters are more likely to work fine right up to their final demise.
For me it's that they're super quiet. My canonet is my "invisible man" camera for street shooting. No mirror slapping up and down to be heard. Plus since there is no mirror, there's less vibration and that lets you shoot handheld at slower speeds. I routinely shoot my canonet at 1/15th second and get nice sharp shots.
Originally Posted by Max Power
Another point in favor of leaf shutters (I believe) is that the motion of all the shutter components is totally concentric, thus (at least theoretically) any vibration caused by shutter leaf motion is self-cancelling, making the minimum potential vibration level zero. If you do get a bad vibration level with a leaf shutter, in my experience it's down to a stiff cable release or release lever.
Merry Christmas to all,
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)