Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: E-1 review

Subject: [OM] Re: E-1 review
From: Mark Marr-Lyon <markml@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:30:20 -0700
Well, yeah, but that's like saying that anti-shake could be added to 
OM's if only they had a little bit of control :)  My point was that the 
mechanism that removes the dust is entirely unsuited for moving the 
sensor in the way it would need to for anti-shake control.  So they're 
no closer to putting anti-shake in the camera than they would be 
without the cleaning system.

Mark

On Mar 16, 2004, at 8:53 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:

> As I said, some control.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> Mark Marr-Lyon wrote:
>
>> Yes, but it doesn't move it as a single unit.  Ultrasonic means it's
>> moving at more than 20kHz, and probably more like a couple hundred
>> kilohertz if not higher.  I would think that several wavelengths would
>> have to fit across the sensor/glass in order to be effective at moving
>> dust, so some parts of the glass are moving in the opposite direction
>> as other parts at any given time.  I would also guess that it chirps
>> the driving frequency to avoid standing waves and the dust collecting
>> at the velocity nodes on the plate (Chladni patterns).
>>
>> To do anti-shake by moving the sensor, a much lower frequency and
>> larger amplitude motion system is needed.


The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus 
List Problem"

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz