Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Apertures: Schneider's vs. Rodenstock's  (Read 1317 times)
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 671



« on: May 13, 2013, 06:21:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Just wondering what most people would prefer, clickable apertures like Schneider's or fluid apertures like Rodenstock's?

I like the ability to go up or down a third from behind the camera, but ultimately I think I would prefer the ability to move in 1/6s and such.  More precision.  

Any takes on this?
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2013, 06:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

I do adjust the aperture "blind" from behind the camera (or below the camera... when it's is mounted above head level) by counting "clicks" very often.
So I'm all for the way Schneider implemented apertures.
1/3 stops work just fine for me.
Actually I think I would prefer 1/2 stops (as on my Contax lenses...).
Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1697


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2013, 09:15:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Joe,

It's funny you ask this, as when I purchased my first Rodenstock, I thought the aperture ring was broken since there were no clicks like the Schneider's have. 

As to what I prefer most, it's tough to say.  I feel that as you point out, the Rodenstock solution may give a bit more fine control but have not way of really knowing this since on the tech camera there is not way to get your aperture setting.  I used to think that by putting the shutter speed on a copal between two of the marks, you could get a shutter speed between two of the fixed settings, i.e. 1/30 and 1/60 to get 1/45th but that doesn't work either. 

The Rodenstock solution is easier to move and not realize it, however the Schneider's bury the aperture ring down so deep, it's hard to get to it, (at least for me)  on the SK35 and SK43.  SK35 especially. 

I guess overall I still like the hard click.

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1241



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2013, 10:09:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I prefer the Rodenstock type of aperture control as in the days of shooting 4x5 trannie film and bracketing it was the the best way to work for me.

Even now when I use my Rodenstock Rodagon lenses on my Horseman VCC unit I disengage the click stop setting.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
DanielStone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 549


« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2013, 01:24:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Well I use Fujinon's primarily(I shoot 4x5 and 5x7 now, occasionally 8x10), and all my shutters(Copal 0's/1's) are all "click stop free".

Wouldn't have it any other way Cool

Occasionally I'll set the aperture for a 1/4(not just 1/3, ya I'm kinda picky about "getting it in-camera") stop settings.
(I shoot all flavors of film, but expose everything as if I was shooting a chrome), so NOT having click-stops is really quite beneficial.

My GX680 uses click-stops, but I wish they would have just made it free-sliding, but with some resistance/friction to keep it set where you want it. Might have to investigate that. FredBGG, you know if this is possible to get modified?

-Dan
Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1400


« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2013, 03:31:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I have both, but I prefer click-stops as I sometimes shoot in awkward positions so I need to set the shutters in the blind.

If I got to choose I'd like to have click-less up to f/11 (the base aperture, very very rarely shoot at larger aperture than that) and 1/2 stops from there and up, just to reduce the number of clicks I need to count.

I also think/suspect that there for large apertures with short DoF there is a larger need to be able to fine-tune the aperture so one can fine-tune the out-of-focus look (so could be an advantage to have the low range clickless for that reason). However I almost never do short DoF photography with my tech camera, and for deep DoF as I do I don't think there is a need to have very detailed aperture setting, and then tactile click-stops is practical.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2013, 03:35:36 AM by torger » Logged
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 671



« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2013, 08:29:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Joe,

It's funny you ask this, as when I purchased my first Rodenstock, I thought the aperture ring was broken since there were no clicks like the Schneider's have. 

The Rodenstock solution is easier to move and not realize it, however the Schneider's bury the aperture ring down so deep, it's hard to get to it, (at least for me)  on the SK35 and SK43.  SK35 especially. 

Paul Caldwell
I have not worked with any other lenses on a recessed lens board other than the SK 35mm, but I would guess they all have this problem.  Getting to the aperture knob and setting the aperture is not so much a problem with me, it is opening the aperture up.  For some reason, someone felt having the aperture knob directly below the shutter cocking lever was a good idea, and at f/11 the knob is directly below the lever.  I find that I often need to cock the lens, move the knob, then release and open the lens for viewing.  This is really annoying, especially since there is amble room above the other aperture scale where a knob could easily fit. 
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1697


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2013, 10:17:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Joe:

I couldn't have said it better.  Smiley  Setting the aperture tricky and I like always just wide the shutter knob to get it out of the way.  The 35SK has this issue in spades, the 43mm SK has a bit more working room.  I use the Kapture Group cable (which I love) and it adds a bit of confusion also since the cables I have are the shorter version and I need the longer ones.   Plus I have the CF installed.  This really cuts down on the room to get fingers in around the aperture knob.  And it makes it next to impossible to get the shutter release in.  I took Don Libby's advice on that issue and installed some extensions that stay in the lens permanently.  The Arca magnetic release doesn't stay in very well imo and since I am using Kapture group's release I can't use the arca anyway.

The other issue on the SK35 is getting it out of the rm3di.  There is nothing to grab since the lens fits flush to the helical.  I tend to turn the helical out 3 full turns to allow me something to grasp.

BTW, if you get around to making the grips for the rm3di, I am still very interested in purchasing a set from you.

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 671



« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2013, 10:37:15 AM »
ReplyReply

The center filter defiantly adds an extra element to dealing with the aperture.  I do not use an one shot cable release like the KG, but have a Phase wake up and a 24 inch cable release.  I did attach the Arca magnet to the 24 inch release and it works well, but does occasionally fall out of place.  (Also, this cable release is about 10 years old and has a woven plastic covering which I think has hardened a bit; I will be getting a new one.)  

I have found that instead of running the Phase wake up under the camera, which is the convention, I place it over the camera and attach the sync pointing up.  This frees up room to deal with the aperture.  

Insofar as attaching the SK35mm, I use a sliding back and can not use the spacer.  I have to grab it by the shutter and because of that do not tighten it too much for fear of damaging the shutter or unscrewing the lens/mount from the shutter.  Also, with out the spacer, the back of the 35mm hits the inside of the camera at about 18mm of shift.  Got to keep this in mind, and I have already scratched off some the paint on the protective ring screwed to the back of the lens.  Fortunately 18mm of shift is as much as it offers, so I am not loosing anything.  
« Last Edit: May 14, 2013, 10:39:30 AM by JoeKitchen » Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
studio347
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2013, 02:12:37 PM »
ReplyReply

clickable shutter is more fast to set up if you are using view finder with an adapter... Sometimes, I need to shoot.. in a few second, after composition. Clickable shutter seems to be better. With modern digital backs, 1/6 stop accuracy becomes less important since it can easily adjusted through capture software without changing the image quality.
And more consistency with the clickable shutter.. since depending on the position of viewing the f stop numbers, the smooth f-stop positioning would be difference even slightly.
Just personal opinion only .. I'm using strobe in most cases...So, it's not so important to adjust minor f-stop.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad