Steve Spencer wrote:
There is no evidence whatsoever that linear motors are simpler than stepper motors. Stepper motors can be super simply and they were as built into clocks for decades. No evidence linear motors are a technological leap either. They have been built into speakers for decades.
There is zero evidence that linear motors are more precise either. Keep in mind stepper motors have kept time precisely for decades in clocks. They have been used for decades and after decades of use they still precisely keep time.
You are again parroting points about linear motors being better than stepper motors with zero evidence. Not a single link comparing the two technologies. There is a name for those sorts of claims: misinformation....Show more →
Sure, no evidence that most stepper motors, even those utilizing electromagnetism, are geared. Exceptions always exist, and of course you can say Wikipedia isn't accurate but scientific articles on Wikipedia have long held up under scruitiny.
However if you wanted a more photo-centric look at the motors, in this post A Look at Electromagnetic Focusing which you clearly didn't read the first time, we see the author introduce linear motors with:
[Linear motors] have some nice advantages over other types of motors: they are simple, silent, and very fast.
Wow, just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts. Very, how shall we say it... simple. Durable. Reliable. This position is reaffirmed years later starting at 23:00 of this podcast by people who take apart and repair cameras all day, and people who design cameras.
But maybe you know more than the fine people at Lensrentals. You did say I was parroting misinformation after all.
However, I'd refer you to your own confident assertion that the mechanics of wrist and pocket watches can be compared at all in terms of precision to the mechanisms that shape soundwaves.
Somehow, Steevo, you seem more confidently ignorant every time I happen to come across you.
JVan_02 wrote:
Sure, no evidence that most stepper motors, even those utilizing electromagnetism, are geared. Exceptions always exist, and of course you can say Wikipedia isn't accurate but scientific articles on Wikipedia have long held up under scruitiny.
However if you wanted a more photo-centric look at the motors, in this post A Look at Electromagnetic Focusing which you clearly didn't read the first time, we see the author introduce linear motors with:
Wow, just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts. Very, how shall we say it... simple. Durable. Reliable. This position is reaffirmed years later starting at 23:00 of this podcast by people who take apart and repair cameras all day, and people who design cameras.
But maybe you know more than the fine people at Lensrentals. You did say I was parroting misinformation after all.
However, I'd refer you to your own confident assertion that the mechanics of wrist and pocket watches can be compared at all in terms of precision to the mechanisms that shape soundwaves.
Somehow, Steevo, you seem more confidently ignorant every time I happen to come across you. ...Show more →
Guys, you can argue all you want but the proof is in the pudding, even Nikon follows other manufacturers (including 3rd party such as Tamron or Sigma) now and puts it in its most advanced lenses (super-teles).
Even if there was no direct proof, reality shows there has to be a reason why everyone moves to voice-coils in their newest & premium lenses ...
May 02, 2023 at 02:18 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
JVan_02 wrote:
Sure, no evidence that most stepper motors, even those utilizing electromagnetism, are geared. Exceptions always exist, and of course you can say Wikipedia isn't accurate but scientific articles on Wikipedia have long held up under scruitiny.
However if you wanted a more photo-centric look at the motors, in this post A Look at Electromagnetic Focusing which you clearly didn't read the first time, we see the author introduce linear motors with:
Wow, just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts. Very, how shall we say it... simple. Durable. Reliable. This position is reaffirmed years later starting at 23:00 of this podcast by people who take apart and repair cameras all day, and people who design cameras.
But maybe you know more than the fine people at Lensrentals. You did say I was parroting misinformation after all.
However, I'd refer you to your own confident assertion that the mechanics of wrist and pocket watches can be compared at all in terms of precision to the mechanisms that shape soundwaves.
Somehow, Steevo, you seem more confidently ignorant every time I happen to come across you. ...Show more →
Confidently ignorant? I think that is a personal attack. Don't you? I made arguments about your argument. You make attacks about me as a person. Not cool and in fact, a clearly inappropriate action. Duly reported.
Oh, and I did read the lens rental blog post (and I have read it several times before). It talks about linear motors being reliable. It does not present any information about them being more reliable than stepper motors. It just doesn't say what you report it saying and that is misinformation. When you post a link and say it says something it doesn't that is misinformation. When someone calls you on it and you call them "Steevo," and personally attack them that is bullying someone when they call you on presenting misinformation. You seem to have that routine down.
JVan_02 wrote:
Sure, no evidence that most stepper motors, even those utilizing electromagnetism, are geared. Exceptions always exist, and of course you can say Wikipedia isn't accurate but scientific articles on Wikipedia have long held up under scruitiny.
However if you wanted a more photo-centric look at the motors, in this post A Look at Electromagnetic Focusing which you clearly didn't read the first time, we see the author introduce linear motors with:
Wow, just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts. Very, how shall we say it... simple. Durable. Reliable. This position is reaffirmed years later starting at 23:00 of this podcast by people who take apart and repair cameras all day, and people who design cameras.
But maybe you know more than the fine people at Lensrentals. You did say I was parroting misinformation after all.
However, I'd refer you to your own confident assertion that the mechanics of wrist and pocket watches can be compared at all in terms of precision to the mechanisms that shape soundwaves.
Somehow, Steevo, you seem more confidently ignorant every time I happen to come across you. ...Show more →
Oh I did not say stepper motors are not geared. Of course they are. What there is not evidence of is that stepper motors are more complex or that they are less reliable. Just because stepper motors have gears does not mean they are more complex or less reliable. That is all misinformation with nothing supporting it.
I won't comment on the obviously inconsistent statement of "just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts." You do realize the magnets are moving along the rail and they are therefore moving parts. That is not only misinformation, but incoherent misinformation. Yes, durable and reliable, but moving parts and no evidence whatsoever that it is more durable or more reliable than stepper motors. No discussion of how the size of the motor and load it must push as affecting durability and reliability with a recognition that the specific motor and how well it is tailored to the task may matter more than the type of the motor. So, lots more misinformation.
Yep, lots of misinformation so go ahead attack me personally but that doesn't change that your arguments are misinformation.
May 02, 2023 at 02:27 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
j4nu wrote:
Guys, you can argue all you want but the proof is in the pudding, even Nikon follows other manufacturers (including 3rd party such as Tamron or Sigma) now and puts it in its most advanced lenses (super-teles).
Even if there was no direct proof, reality shows there has to be a reason why everyone moves to voice-coils in their newest & premium lenses ...
There has to be a reason, but it doesn't have to be reliability and durability. It could be cost. It could be lens design. It could be weight savings. We don't know and people saying it is X with no evidence that it is X or no acknowledgement that it is a guess is not useful. People going further and saying that these lenses are clearly better than other alternatives with no evidence to back that up or if they link to an article and say it says something it does not that is misinformation.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Confidently ignorant? I think that is a personal attack. Don't you? I made arguments about your argument. You make attacks about me as a person. Not cool and in fact, a clearly inappropriate action. Duly reported.
Oh, and I did read the lens rental blog post (and I have read it several times before). It talks about linear motors being reliable. It does not present any information about them being more reliable than stepper motors. It just doesn't say what you report it saying and that is misinformation. When you post a link and say it says something it doesn't that is misinformation. When someone calls you on it and you call them "Steve," and personally attack them that is bullying someone when they call you on presenting misinformation. You seem to have that routine down....Show more →
Take it how you'd like. Personally, I think it's an observation but if you feel attacked that's fine.
While it's true the first blog post speculates more than prescribes the greater durability of linear motors—a more prescriptive statement is posited in the podcast discussion between Cicala and Mark Weir. Not mentioning that blog post seems to be a bit lying by omission, eh?
But even if you can't wrap your head around that, you're missing the major engineering move toward solid state/simpler mechanisms in a lot of industries that can manage them. Take external storage for instance. See the annual failure rate of SSDs vs HDDs.
For more robust machines & use, see electric vs gasoline car comparisons. There are articles from as far back as 2003 to current governmental advisories stating that simpler mechanisms with fewer moving parts last longer.
Yes, this isn't directly camera/lens related. However, the whole industry is so free with information that our greatest comparisons are a scant 10 copies of a given lens at a time. We'll need to make some inferences.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Oh I did not say stepper motors are not geared. Of course they are. What there is not evidence of is that stepper motors are more complex or that they are less reliable. Just because stepper motors have gears does not mean they are more complex or less reliable. That is all misinformation with nothing supporting it.
I won't comment on the obviously inconsistent statement of "just elements driven along a rail via magnetism. No moving parts." You do realize the magnets are moving along the rail and they are therefore moving parts. That is not only misinformation, but incoherent misinformation. Yes, durable and reliable, but moving parts and no evidence whatsoever that it is more durable or more reliable than stepper motors. No discussion of how the size of the motor and load it must push as affecting durability and reliability with a recognition that the specific motor and how well it is tailored to the task may matter more than the type of the motor. So, lots more misinformation.
Yep, lots of misinformation so go ahead attack me personally but that doesn't change that your arguments are misinformation....Show more →
Typically 'moving parts' refers to a part connected to an engine/gear/mechanism that induces work friction and/or stress. So long as the parts are properly lubed, you'll get less mechanical stress on the rail of a linear motor than if it was left exposed on a windy day at the beach. However, if 'moving parts' is too complex a definition for you to infer, fine—linear motors have no parts that receive force in a way that stresses any of the mechanisms that actually make the elements move.
The same cannot be said for stepper motors, which is why they are more mechanically complex. Unfortunately, I cannot find any direct patents of stepper & linear motors currently in use with which to diagram and educate you. However, as you've yet to produce a single source for anything you're saying I think I really don't need to.
Jerky_san wrote:
I was wondering if any of you could shed any light on Samyang and their steppers? They claim they have "Linear STM" but I've seen some people on comments sections say they don't really have Linears in the sense that Tamron and Sony have but instead are just using marketing.
that is 100% correct, because sony xd linear af motors are true linear motors, there aren't any gears and there isn't any rotational movement.
the first photo below is from a samyang post, it's a shot of their stm motor in their 50/1.4ii lens, it is obviously slow and extremely inefficient because it has to change the stepper motor rotational movement into linear motion, using a long screw that moves the lens group in linear fashion.
the second photo is the stepper motor that tamron used to use, it's the same fake "linear" drive, but this time you can see the screw threads in the shaft better.
the third photo was posted by nikon, it shows the rotational movement of their stepper motor; unfortunately nikon chose to build nearly their entire lens ecosystem around that bogus design, including putting it in their $6500 800pf lens... for that reason alone, i would never buy into the z-mount platform; at the prices nikon charges you shouldn't have to be getting primitive stepper motor lens technology.
osv2 wrote:
that is 100% correct, because sony xd linear af motors are true linear motors, there aren't any gears and there isn't any rotational movement.
the first photo below is from a samyang post, it's a shot of their stm motor in their 50/1.4ii lens, it is obviously slow and extremely inefficient because it has to change the stepper motor rotational movement into linear motion, using a long screw that moves the lens group in linear fashion.
the second photo is the stepper motor that tamron used to use, it's the same fake "linear" drive, but this time you can see the screw threads in the shaft better.
the third photo was posted by nikon, it shows the rotational movement of their stepper motor; unfortunately nikon chose to build nearly their entire lens ecosystem around that bogus design, including putting it in their $6500 800pf lens... for that reason alone, i would never buy into the z-mount platform; at the prices nikon charges you shouldn't have to be getting primitive stepper motor lens technology.
Guess I didn't mean to cause such a stir on the stepper motor question. Btw I am not near as into cameras and photography and many as you. But I am incredibly got at computer hardware. Just throwing it out there physical drives usually die because their heads will touch the platters which is called a "head crash" or they heads will fail to move into position on the platters though that one is much easier to recover from.(if you need to recover data that is..)
JVan_02 wrote:
Take it how you'd like. Personally, I think it's an observation but if you feel attacked that's fine.
While it's true the first blog post speculates more than prescribes the greater durability of linear motors—a more prescriptive statement is posited in the podcast discussion between Cicala and Mark Weir. Not mentioning that blog post seems to be a bit lying by omission, eh?
But even if you can't wrap your head around that, you're missing the major engineering move toward solid state/simpler mechanisms in a lot of industries that can manage them. Take external storage for instance. See the annual failure rate of SSDs vs HDDs.
For more robust machines & use, see electric vs gasoline car comparisons. There are articles from as far back as 2003 to current governmental advisories stating that simpler mechanisms with fewer moving parts last longer.
Yes, this isn't directly camera/lens related. However, the whole industry is so free with information that our greatest comparisons are a scant 10 copies of a given lens at a time. We'll need to make some inferences. ...Show more →
Calling people names and saying it is an observation is beyond the pale. Then saying you are fine with people feeling attacked isn't ok either. Note the post got deleted because it was a personal attack. Please stop such nonsense.
What is the prescriptive statement from the podcast? Quote it and then we can move on for a discussion. Linking a podcast and saying it says something is quite short of providing a quote and noting where it is in the podcast so the quote can be understood in context. Just linking a podcast is not evidence and remember you are the one claiming evidence, so it is on you to provide such evidence. You still haven't done so and linking a podcast still looks like misinformation. My not commenting and a podcast that you don't even quote or reference where the quote is on the the podcast isn't an omission it is just I don't know what your claim as evidence because your aren't providing what you claim to be evidence. In short, if you want to discuss the podcast you at least need to provide a quote and the time into the podcast where it occurs.
SSD vs. HDD has nothing to do with stepper motors vs. linear motors. That you claim it does shows just how little evidence you have for your claims. Suggesting that it does have something to do with motors is further evidence of your providing misinformation.
May 02, 2023 at 07:53 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
osv2 wrote:
that is 100% correct, because sony xd linear af motors are true linear motors, there aren't any gears and there isn't any rotational movement.
the first photo below is from a samyang post, it's a shot of their stm motor in their 50/1.4ii lens, it is obviously slow and extremely inefficient because it has to change the stepper motor rotational movement into linear motion, using a long screw that moves the lens group in linear fashion.
the second photo is the stepper motor that tamron used to use, it's the same fake "linear" drive, but this time you can see the screw threads in the shaft better.
the third photo was posted by nikon, it shows the rotational movement of their stepper motor; unfortunately nikon chose to build nearly their entire lens ecosystem around that bogus design, including putting it in their $6500 800pf lens... for that reason alone, i would never buy into the z-mount platform; at the prices nikon charges you shouldn't have to be getting primitive stepper motor lens technology.
And more misinformation about stepper motors. Yes stepper motors have gears and they have rotation movement. Zero evidence that either of those things are bad.
May 02, 2023 at 07:55 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
JVan_02 wrote:
Typically 'moving parts' refers to a part connected to an engine/gear/mechanism that induces work friction and/or stress. So long as the parts are properly lubed, you'll get less mechanical stress on the rail of a linear motor than if it was left exposed on a windy day at the beach. However, if 'moving parts' is too complex a definition for you to infer, fine—linear motors have no parts that receive force in a way that stresses any of the mechanisms that actually make the elements move.
The same cannot be said for stepper motors, which is why they are more mechanically complex. Unfortunately, I cannot find any direct patents of stepper & linear motors currently in use with which to diagram and educate you. However, as you've yet to produce a single source for anything you're saying I think I really don't need to. ...Show more →
Uh, I am saying there is no evidence for your claims. That your claims are misinformation. Kind of hard to provide a source that there is no evidence. I can't show evidence that unicorns don't exist either. That doesn't mean they do. You are the one making the claims. It is on you to provide evidence for your claims. I am merely pointing out that there is no evidence for your claims, and since you admit you cannot provide evidence then it is pretty clear that you are indeed providing misinformation.
Nobody gives a damn about your stupid debate. You are ruining this thread. Let people post some images and if you are so keen on proving each other wrong, exchange your email addresses and keep the rest of us out of it.
May 02, 2023 at 08:43 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Nobody gives a damn about your stupid debate. You are ruining this thread. Let people post some images and if you are so keen on proving each other wrong, exchange your email addresses and keep the rest of us out of it.
I am not keen on proving anyone wrong. I am keen on calling misinformation, misinformation. As I said I can't prove anything, but I can point out when people make big claims without any evidence to support them and that happens regularly on this forum with regard to linear motors.
All we need is a review comparing the lenses for AF performance. It doesn't matter what motor is used, all what matters if it's giving the needed performance.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I am not keen on proving anyone wrong. I am keen on calling misinformation, misinformation. As I said I can't prove anything, but I can point out when people make big claims without any evidence to support them and that happens regularly on this forum with regard to linear motors.
I'm too lazy to prove anything, as it's pretty hard (if not impossible) to quantify "AF performance" including and equalizing all relevant factors - let alone finding scientific information on that for free - , however, from my memory, some slower focusing lenses (RF stm primes, Sigma FE 85mm Art DN) do have stepper motors, whereas some faster focusing lenses (RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM) do use linear motors.
I could try to make a list with stepper motor lenses and linear motor lenses being apples to apples enough to compare, and link some reviews telling something about AF-speed. Despite the lack of any evidence at "forehand" (sorry, still lazy) I'm still expecting that list could show a pattern showing the linear focusing lenses do focus faster than stepper motor lenses. Please, don't take this telling about personal expectations as information, it isn't meant to be taken as such.
May 03, 2023 at 08:57 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
steamtrain wrote:
I'm too lazy to prove anything, as it's pretty hard (if not impossible) to quantify "AF performance" including and equalizing all relevant factors - let alone finding scientific information on that for free - , however, from my memory, some slower focusing lenses (RF stm primes, Sigma FE 85mm Art DN) do have stepper motors, whereas some faster focusing lenses (RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM) do use linear motors.
I could try to make a list with stepper motor lenses and linear motor lenses being apples to apples enough to compare, and link some reviews telling something about AF-speed. Despite the lack of any evidence at "forehand" (sorry, still lazy) I'm still expecting that list could show a pattern showing the linear focusing lenses do focus faster than stepper motor lenses. Please, don't take this telling about personal expectations as information, it isn't meant to be taken as such. ...Show more →
That is a totally reasonable expectation, but my own view is that almost all newer lenses are doing AF better. On being quiet that is especially so. I also think Sony to its credit has built really good AF into their lenses and they have focussed on that and they have decided to almost exclusively use linear motors. So, how much of the good performance is linear motors and how much of it is Sony deciding on design goals that emphasize AF, and how much did they pick linear motors to achieve those design goals for AF vs. for other reasons like size and cost we will never know. What we do know is Sony builds a lot of lenses with good AF and they typically use linear motors. That is a good thing. What we can't know is whether they could have built lenses that were just as good or almost as good if they used stepper motors. I don't see the reason to make the comparison. Like you said above what we need is for each lens information about how the AF performs and that is what really matters.
