bernardl wrote:
Some answers:
1. The pre-DSLR cameras sold in much lower volumes than what you indicate, there was no other choice, the mounts were smaller in diameter and deeper (the shutter was less likely to be accidentally hit), the shutter type were much cruder, and therefore a lot less fragile, than modern shutters syncing at 1/250 or faster. So there is really no comparison and your historical "data" is of low relevance I am afraid,
2. The a9III doesn't have a shutter, it has a dedicated shield like the Z8/Z9 which is much more robust than a shutter. Which itself confirms the fragility of the shutter, why would Sony have spent cash designing a dedicated shield if the shutter were robust enough?
3. Where are the data enabling you to claim that nobody is breaking shutters when using them as sensor protectors?
I am afraid that your views are once again driven by the desire to defend Sony designs (prior to the a9III) more than by a genuine belief in the argument you are trying to defend in the face of logic.
Yes pre-slr sold in fewer numbers, but sold for many years so I am sure there are millions out there. which is what I said.
Actually as I said in my previous quote, when someone tried to credit Sony as first, I corrected him and credited Canon for the current feature. But again I pointed out that it was actually Leica who was first doing this in mirrorless a decade before Canon, Sony and the rest.
As I repeatedly stated in my post I am basing my opinion on the lack of reports of problems, not published data.
Your natural instincts to protect Nikon has colored your reading of posts, and your views on the appropriateness of this feature. I am not praising Sony in any way. I am just questioning Nikons choice in this matter. But I guess for you questioning Nikon is equivalent to praising Sony. Absolutely no common sense in that.
But I will allow that maybe Nikon has done some study on this issue. Maybe having the biggest mount, that is closest to the sensor is what makes Nikon Z cameras more prone to problems when including the feature. That could be why Nikon is not including it while all the other manufacturers are. I am sure over time the true levels of risk will be recognized.
story_teller wrote:
I think there are two issues -
- You have to go through multiple gyrations for each lens change. Many times you won’t have the luxury of that time.
- It risky to remove the battery with the camera turned on. You may get away with it or maybe you won’t. You risk corruption of your settings or worse, electrical damage to the circuitry or corruption of the firmware. Getting the camera’s firmware re-imaged requires a trip to Nikon.
I can’t believe all the dust that’s been kicked up about this! (pun intended) We’ve taken trillions of great photos without a sensor shields and now, all of a sudden, it’s a life or death situation?? A little common sense goes a long way....Show more →
There is no evidence removing the battery while the camera is on is risky. The settings are saved by the step of turning the camera off prior to turning it back on and removing the battery. And there's no basis for electrical damage or firmware corruption by simply cutting power to the camera. If that were true then every single piece of electronics in the world would be at risk every time someone flips a light switch controlling an outlet.
story_teller wrote:
I can’t believe all the dust that’s been kicked up about this! (pun intended) We’ve taken trillions of great photos without a sensor shields and now, all of a sudden, it’s a life or death situation?? A little common sense goes a long way.
Apparently you have never shot video or much video or had no need to change a lens in a dusty environment. Sure if you are shooting stills open the file in PS and presto no more dust. Try fixing a dust issue on a 10 second clip that has been recorded at 60 fps. Now it’s a major major issue in any video editing software.
So, if the sensor is covered during a dusty lens change, where does the dust go? On the sensor shield? So it’s still floating around inside the camera?
chatcher wrote:
So, if the sensor is covered during a dusty lens change, where does the dust go? On the sensor shield? So it’s still floating around inside the camera?
If you're using your SHUTTER as a shield as described, yes, all that grit and dust are now in between your shutter blades.
snapsy wrote:
I guess the largest manufacturer of digital cameras in the world is insane because they allow their shutters to be closed for lens changes.
chatcher wrote:
So, if the sensor is covered during a dusty lens change, where does the dust go? On the sensor shield? So it’s still floating around inside the camera?
Someplace other than the image sensor. Dust tends to not float around inside a closed chamber after it has attached to a surface, which is why it's a problem for image sensors.
snapsy wrote:
I guess the largest manufacturer of digital cameras in the world is insane because they allow their shutters to be closed for lens changes.
I don't understand the complaining. Using the Canon R5 for a while with its shutter shield function made me wonder why every camera manufacturer doesn't do this. I have accidentally placed a finger directly onto the sensor so many times when changing lenses on mirrorless cameras. I remember shooting a yoga retreat in the jungles of Costa Rica about 8-9 years ago (a couple day voyage from the airport including a boat ride down the Amazon river), and placing a big sweaty thumb print right in the middle of a Sony A7ii sensor. I got really good at using the healing brush haha
MRomine wrote:
Apparently you have never shot video or much video or had no need to change a lens in a dusty environment. Sure if you are shooting stills open the file in PS and presto no more dust. Try fixing a dust issue on a 10 second clip that has been recorded at 60 fps. Now it’s a major major issue in any video editing software.
So what did you do with those thousands of hours of clips you took before a couple cameras came out with shields?? Were all of your clips ruined? If you are absolutely that worried about this issue, get a video-only camera.
sungphoto wrote:
I don't understand the complaining. Using the Canon R5 for a while with its shutter shield function made me wonder why every camera manufacturer doesn't do this. I have accidentally placed a finger directly onto the sensor so many times when changing lenses on mirrorless cameras. I remember shooting a yoga retreat in the jungles of Costa Rica about 8-9 years ago (a couple day voyage from the airport including a boat ride down the Amazon river), and placing a big sweaty thumb print right in the middle of a Sony A7ii sensor. I got really good at using the healing brush haha...Show more →
I agree, although if you're finding yourself accidentally touching the sensor during lens changes you might want to consider actually leaving the shutter open - it's much more delicate than the cover glass of the sensor.
I can't speak for MRomine but I can list several factors making sensor dust in video a more pressing issue than it was in the past:
Before MILC cameras, DSLRs were used for some video and there is both a shutter and mirror in front of the sensor when doing lens changes, reducing the contamination on the sensor, and even moving some of it about (the mirror movement causes air flow).
Before DSLR video, most video was shot with cameras with integrated lenses and so there was less of a chance for dust to enter the camera.
Before FullHD and 4K, one could also be saved by the the video being so low resolution that dust specs were not as obvious.
Movies until recently were shot with film, and what dust landed on the film was not there for the next frame.
Finally, the optical paths of the light are different when using Z lenses (at least compared to F-mount and other DSLR lenses) and as a result of this, any dust on the sensor is more visible than it would have been when using a DSLR.
However, as the flange distance is short, the manufacturers cannot put in all they would like to: sensor shield, ND filters, and mechanical shutter all compete for the same space. I doubt that we will see even two out of these three in a single camera, but I could be wrong. It'll be interesting to see if any Z mount RED camera shows up with NDs.
story_teller wrote:
So what did you do with those thousands of hours of clips you took before a couple cameras came out with shields?? Were all of your clips ruined? If you are absolutely that worried about this issue, get a video-only camera.
story_teller wrote:
So what did you do with those thousands of hours of clips you took before a couple cameras came out with shields?? Were all of your clips ruined?
Yes or on a rare occasion to try to save a special clip I would use the clone tool in Resolve and go painstakingly frame by frame. Last week I lost roughly 20 clips from a single speck of dust from one single lens change.
story_teller wroteIf you are absolutely that worried about this issue, get a video-only camera.
Well I just started shooting video about three years ago with the acquisition of the Z6II. I had limited experience prior to that of shooting video and that was only with a closed system DJI drone. If I had known that I would have run into this issue I might have chosen a different route, but likely not. The jobs that I am shooting require both stills and video and at times I need a wide angle shift lens that would not be available in a closed system video camera.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
I can't speak for MRomine but I can list several factors making sensor dust in video a more pressing issue than it was in the past:
Before MILC cameras, DSLRs were used for some video and there is both a shutter and mirror in front of the sensor when doing lens changes, reducing the contamination on the sensor, and even moving some of it about (the mirror movement causes air flow).
Before DSLR video, most video was shot with cameras with integrated lenses and so there was less of a chance for dust to enter the camera.
Before FullHD and 4K, one could also be saved by the the video being so low resolution that dust specs were not as obvious.
Movies until recently were shot with film, and what dust landed on the film was not there for the next frame.
Finally, the optical paths of the light are different when using Z lenses (at least compared to F-mount and other DSLR lenses) and as a result of this, any dust on the sensor is more visible than it would have been when using a DSLR.
However, as the flange distance is short, the manufacturers cannot put in all they would like to: sensor shield, ND filters, and mechanical shutter all compete for the same space. I doubt that we will see even two out of these three in a single camera, but I could be wrong. It'll be interesting to see if any Z mount RED camera shows up with NDs.
This is a good writeup/reminder on the fault tree for this. It's frustrating if you change lenses in even environments that you don't think are dusty and still find dust spots in your images. It's been the biggest driver for me swapping lenses less frequently and having more lenses sit unused for a time.
I realistically try to clean my sensor every 2-3 months now, but only ever cleaned my DSLR sensor 2-3 times across 10 years.
snapsy wrote:
Someplace other than the image sensor. Dust tends to not float around inside a closed chamber after it has attached to a surface, which is why it's a problem for image sensors.
In my experience using the shutter as a dust shield has reduced dust on the sensor a great deal. All of my cameras thankfully now have this feature. I honestly believe that Nikon should make this an option on all of their mirrorless ICL cameras.
snapsy wrote:
I agree, although if you're finding yourself accidentally touching the sensor during lens changes you might want to consider actually leaving the shutter open - it's much more delicate than the cover glass of the sensor.
I have never actually scratched the cover glass on a sensor thankfully. I also never accidentally pressed down on the shutter shield when I had my R5. When I switched back to all Nikon, I did kind of miss the sensor shield function.
Otherwise, I like that the Z6iii can do 125 mins of video now (though I wish that limit was removed, as I often need to record 3-4 hours at a time), and full frame 4k60. From the tests that are being posted on youtube, looks like the overheating issues are gone. I find that the the Z6ii will overheat after just ~20-25 mins of 4k60 (and that's cropped to DX), which is kind of a bummer.
All that said, I'll probably get another Z8 used rather than pick up the Z6iii.
This is a good writeup/reminder on the fault tree for this. It's frustrating if you change lenses in even environments that you don't think are dusty and still find dust spots in your images. It's been the biggest driver for me swapping lenses less frequently and having more lenses sit unused for a time.
I realistically try to clean my sensor every 2-3 months now, but only ever cleaned my DSLR sensor 2-3 times across 10 years.
Back in my D850 days I needed to check for dust every 8-10 lens changes. Colorado is good for many things - weather, scenery, lack of bugs - but we are dusty. With the Z7 and Z7ii, it was even worse. And it definitely affected how often I would change lenses. However, the sensor shield on the Z8 has been a game changer for me. Now I go weeks on end without a dust spot. I can't see myself getting a new body that doesn't have a shield of some sort.
