It is now clear to me that adding movements to a camera makes the camera less stable.
Since cameras remain box shaped for 99.9% of photos, i dont get it.
Disclaimer: if your comment to this is "but i use movements all the time", please keep your anecdotal irrelevancies to yourself.
Despair not! Perhaps there is a market for a micro-movement tripod platform that balances the camera to accommodate the swings, tilts, and so forth! Call it the Jobo Sowho, as in 'so who' cares.Originally Posted by koh303
.
Isn't your thread anecdotal?
factual.
OK I'll bite - exactly how do movements influence stability? For example...
Is it the movements themselves, or is it because a design that permits movements might result in some part of the camera being less solid/stable?
I'll agree to the first point, but would like to know your source for your second point, which cannot be correct for shots taken with view cameras. Are you referring to your own use of camera equipment?
Why would I shoot LF if I didn't have movements?
Kent in SD
In contento ed allegria
Notte e di vogliam passar!
Major manufacturers of view cameras - Sinar, Linhof, Toyo, etc. have taken adequate measures to reduce the effects of instability caused by movements. I have used view cameras from these manufacturers for over 30 years, and have not experienced any "instability" problems with the cameras themselves. Tripods and heads, yes. Wear and tear on mechanical components probably would cause problems.
Kumar
robert polidori might answer that for you.Why would I shoot LF if I didn't have movements?
Kent in SD
Without being rude, lots of people in the world have not experienced being struck by lightning...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks