Yes, an interesting question. But I'd be inclined to think that the
mass of a winder would add to the stability of the camera when shooting.
I think we all finally concluded that the real vibration problem with
the OM was the normally open diaphragm. To kick the diaphragm closed
(especially in big lenses) takes a monstrous kick from the diaphragm
activation lever in the body. That strong kick imparts a jerk to the
camera in the opposite direction. The more mass to be moved the less
the shake that gets imparted.
Or buy a Nikon or other brand which has normally closed lenses. Could
be Maitani San's largest design error.
Chuck Norcutt
On 1/4/2012 9:20 AM, Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
> Brian, I thought the same 'till another list member told me just the
> opposite, during an off-list exchange.
>
> I don't have a clue whether the winder2 damps or resonates the
> inherent vibration, but me thinks it's an interesting problem to pose
> and solve.
>
> Unfortunately, I'm not able to carry on an empirical investigation, I
> think Gary might have considered the question but either avoided the
> making of a much more complex troubleshoot, or assumed a winder2
> increased vibration.
>
> Investigation never ends :-)
>
> Fernando.
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Brian Swale<bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> 1) Given the propensity for OM cameras to have more inherent vibration
>> when a Zuiko lens is used, the extra mass of the winder versus the simple
>> grip HAS to be a bonus at reducing vibration.
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|