K-1 Sensor Artculation

photoptimist · 06-14-2018, 06:04 AM

Originally posted by reh321

Do the view cameras with tilt mechanism have leaf shutters or do they use "focal plane" shutters?

The trick answer is they have BOTH!

First, they have a "slow" manually operated focal plane shutter in the form of the darkslide on the film holder.

Second, they have a "fast" leaf shutter in the lens that can open and close quickly.

Given that it's much easy to make a "fast" shutter mechanism for a 1.8" inch diameter hole than for a 4" x 5" or larger rectangle, view cameras use leaf shutters in the lens for short controlled exposure times.

**ffking** · 06-14-2018, 06:13 AM

wasn't there a Ricoh patent for a tilting sensor filed a few months back?

reh321 · 06-14-2018, 06:43 AM

Originally posted by ffking

wasn't there a Ricoh patent for a tilting sensor filed a few months back?

Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen.

**ffking** · 06-14-2018, 06:57 AM

Originally posted by reh321

Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen.

I'm thinking more 645 next generation - there's a bit more space in there - I need to find the original post when I've got a moment,

here we are:

https://pentaxrumors.com/2017/10/24/the-latest-ricoh-patents-tilting-sensor/#more-2944

photoptimist · 06-14-2018, 07:00 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by reh321

Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen.

There are no issues with this because there is no reason to tilt the sensor toward the lens closer than the infinity setting. All the useful tilting functions can do done by tilting the sensor back further from the shutter.

LensBeginner · 06-14-2018, 10:08 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by photoptimist

There are no issues with this because there is no reason to tilt the sensor toward the lens closer than the infinity setting. All the useful tilting functions can do done by tilting the sensor back further from the shutter.

One reason I could find: recover infinity with adapted lenses, if the adapter makes you lose it by a hair.
But that's geeky stuff.

reh321 · 06-14-2018, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

One reason I could find: recover infinity with adapted lenses, if the adapter makes you lose it by a hair.
But that's geeky stuff.

Don't all lenses {with infinity focus} focus to the same plane?

Native lens, adapter lens shouldn't make a difference, because adapter should just make up for flange difference.

LensBeginner · 06-14-2018, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by reh321

Don't all lenses {with infinity focus} focus to the same plane?

Native lens, adapter lens shouldn't make a difference, because adapter should just make up for flange difference.

If there's space to spare, sure.

But for instance some M42-to-Pentax-K adapters make you lose infinity focus, because they stick a millimeter or so over the camera body.
Also, there could be a case where flange focal distance is very close (e.g. Nikon F-mount 46.50 mm, Pentax K mount 45.46mm), and the bayonet quite similar, so when adapting in one sense you keep infinity focus, while in the other you don't.
A shift forward of the sensor of one or two millimeters could be enough to solve those issues.

As I said, geeky things, and nothing that would interest the majority of the users, not for native lenses anyway.

Kunzite · 06-14-2018, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

A shift forward of the sensor of one or two millimeters could be enough to solve those issues.

Yeah... OTOH the floating mirror design was required on the K-1, because there was no room for a straightforward design, considering:
- viewfinder specifications
- presence of the SR platform

A shift of 1-2mm to correct disfunctional, cheap third party adapters won't happen.

LensBeginner · 06-14-2018, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Yeah... OTOH the floating mirror design was required on the K-1, because there was no room for a straightforward design, considering:
- viewfinder specifications
- presence of the SR platform

A shift of 1-2mm to correct disfunctional, cheap third party adapters won't happen.

I know, and I won't ask for it.
I mean, I'm all for de-crippling the K-mount (and that won't happen either I guess...), but this was just for the sake of the argument!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sensor Stack (glass in front of sensor) and legacy vs modern lenses	carrrlangas	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	06-24-2014 11:27 AM
New Sony Sensor with phase detection AF pixels on sensor!	Docrwm	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	08-22-2012 04:28 AM
K-x Sony Sensor vs K-7 Samsung Sensor	karl79	Video Recording and Processing	9	09-23-2010 09:35 AM
Sensor cleaning: Pec-Pads or Sensor Swabs	gadgetnu	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	29	09-24-2007 10:52 AM
Sensor cleaning > Sensor Swab > void warranty?	Twinky	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	07-28-2007 01:10 AM

06-14-2018, 06:04 AM	#31
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,126	Originally posted by reh321 Do the view cameras with tilt mechanism have leaf shutters or do they use "focal plane" shutters? The trick answer is they have BOTH! First, they have a "slow" manually operated focal plane shutter in the form of the darkslide on the film holder. Second, they have a "fast" leaf shutter in the lens that can open and close quickly. Given that it's much easy to make a "fast" shutter mechanism for a 1.8" inch diameter hole than for a 4" x 5" or larger rectangle, view cameras use leaf shutters in the lens for short controlled exposure times.

06-14-2018, 06:13 AM	#32
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	wasn't there a Ricoh patent for a tilting sensor filed a few months back?

06-14-2018, 06:43 AM	#33
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by ffking wasn't there a Ricoh patent for a tilting sensor filed a few months back? Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen.

06-14-2018, 06:57 AM	#34
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by reh321 Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen. I'm thinking more 645 next generation - there's a bit more space in there - I need to find the original post when I've got a moment, here we are: https://pentaxrumors.com/2017/10/24/the-latest-ricoh-patents-tilting-sensor/#more-2944

06-14-2018, 07:00 AM - 1 Like	#35
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,126	Originally posted by reh321 Considering the issues with a sensor getting in the way of the "focal plane" shutter, making a tilting sensor might be easier for a "Q" with its leaf shutter in the lens - but I don't think that's going to happen. There are no issues with this because there is no reason to tilt the sensor toward the lens closer than the infinity setting. All the useful tilting functions can do done by tilting the sensor back further from the shutter.

06-14-2018, 10:08 AM - 1 Like	#36
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by photoptimist There are no issues with this because there is no reason to tilt the sensor toward the lens closer than the infinity setting. All the useful tilting functions can do done by tilting the sensor back further from the shutter. One reason I could find: recover infinity with adapted lenses, if the adapter makes you lose it by a hair. But that's geeky stuff.

06-14-2018, 11:58 AM	#37
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by LensBeginner One reason I could find: recover infinity with adapted lenses, if the adapter makes you lose it by a hair. But that's geeky stuff. Don't all lenses {with infinity focus} focus to the same plane? Native lens, adapter lens shouldn't make a difference, because adapter should just make up for flange difference.

06-14-2018, 12:05 PM	#38
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by reh321 Don't all lenses {with infinity focus} focus to the same plane? Native lens, adapter lens shouldn't make a difference, because adapter should just make up for flange difference. If there's space to spare, sure. But for instance some M42-to-Pentax-K adapters make you lose infinity focus, because they stick a millimeter or so over the camera body. Also, there could be a case where flange focal distance is very close (e.g. Nikon F-mount 46.50 mm, Pentax K mount 45.46mm), and the bayonet quite similar, so when adapting in one sense you keep infinity focus, while in the other you don't. A shift forward of the sensor of one or two millimeters could be enough to solve those issues. As I said, geeky things, and nothing that would interest the majority of the users, not for native lenses anyway.

06-14-2018, 12:22 PM	#39
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by LensBeginner A shift forward of the sensor of one or two millimeters could be enough to solve those issues. Yeah... OTOH the floating mirror design was required on the K-1, because there was no room for a straightforward design, considering: - viewfinder specifications - presence of the SR platform A shift of 1-2mm to correct disfunctional, cheap third party adapters won't happen.

06-14-2018, 12:26 PM	#40
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by Kunzite Yeah... OTOH the floating mirror design was required on the K-1, because there was no room for a straightforward design, considering: - viewfinder specifications - presence of the SR platform A shift of 1-2mm to correct disfunctional, cheap third party adapters won't happen. I know, and I won't ask for it. I mean, I'm all for de-crippling the K-mount (and that won't happen either I guess...), but this was just for the sake of the argument!