Choosing CS versions for non-strobe use?

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It seems most users choose the CS lenses when they need faster flash sync rates than the regular focal plane versions, and are willing to pay the premium for that.

 

But I wondered if there are other advantages and disadvantages to consider. I don't intend to use my new S for strobe work, at least not principally. But it crossed my mind that there might be an advantage in leaf shutter exposure in gaining a stop or two in hand-holdability, due to the lose of mirror slap. Have I got that right? (I guess it is also a quite way to work, right?)

 

Downsides on the other hand would be higher cost, higher weight penalty, and I am wondering too if there is a deficit in reliability, given the simple rule that the more electronic gubbins and moving parts inside a lens there more there is to go wrong at some point. This is an electronically governed leaf shutter motor after all, not some Copal thing from the '60s.

 

Has anyone faced this dilemma and gone for CS for reasons other than flash sync?

 

I guess taking my new S into a Leica store and trying two versions side by side would answer some of this too...

 

Thanks.

[albireo_double]

There is no benefit at all using the CS mode unless you are using strobes outside, in the daylight (or in any other situation with high levels of ambient light). The way the camera operates in the CS mode is that the focal plan shutter opens first, then the leaf shutter operates, then the focal plane shutter closes again (you need to get the FP shutter out  of the way). In other words, the focal plane shutter always operates, no matter which shutter mode you are in, so you don't get any benefit of greater handholdability (or lower vibration on tripod, in mirror-up mode) by using the CS mode. The CS mode is there only to allow you to control ambient light through the use of faster shutter speeds, while syncing with strobes - i.e. typically when using strobes outside. If you work in a typical studio (darkened, with minimum ambient light), then you can happily use non-CS lenses and sync the strobes at 1/125s because the minimum levels of ambient light will have no impact on the image at that shutter speed and at the base ISO.

Edited August 2, 2015 by albireo_double

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Winedemonium]

There is no benefit at all using the CS mode unless you are using strobes outside, in the daylight (or in any other situation with high levels of ambient light). The way the camera operates in the CS mode is that the focal plan shutter opens first, then the leaf shutter operates, then the focal plane shutter closes again (you need to get the FP shutter out  of the way). In other words, the focal plane shutter always operates, no matter which shutter mode you are in, so you don't get any benefit of greater handholdability (or lower vibration on tripod, in mirror-up mode) by using the CS mode. The CS mode is there only to allow you to control ambient light through the use of faster shutter speeds, while syncing with strobes - i.e. typically when using strobes outside. If you work in a typical studio (darkened, with minimum ambient light), then you can happily use non-CS lenses and sync the strobes at 1/125s because the minimum levels of ambient light will have no impact on the image at that shutter speed and at the base ISO.

 

Super helpful, thank you! And there I was wondering if the CS lenses might get around this, but the logic of what you state is undeniable -- that great big mirror has to get out of the way before the shutter can be released. Perhaps the advantage I imagine might exist in a future mirrorless S version or solution (native or adapted). But no point paying the premium for idea vapour. 

 

FPS versions it is then.

[albireo_double]

Not just the mirror - also the FP shutter has to get out of the way. In other words, it does NOT work like the "F" series Hasselblads, if that's what you were thinking.

[hoppyman]

".....I don't intend to use my new S for strobe work, at least not principally."
OK but if you do some of the time ;-)

 

"Downsides on the other hand would be higher cost" Yep!

"higher weight penalty".... I don't think that the central shutter adds significant weight. It has dictated the volume to some extent in the initial design,however the barrel dimensions are the same for both versions of course

"and I am wondering too if there is a deficit in reliability, given the simple rule that the more electronic gubbins and moving parts inside a lens there more there is to go wrong at some point. This is an electronically governed leaf shutter motor after all, not some Copal thing from the '60s.".....possibly, at least I'm not aware of reports regarding shutter reliability. The initial design from an outside provider ended up being supplanted by something from Leica Camera themselves. As was explained by alberio_double, the focal plane shutter always operated as well in any case. But Copal have provided millions of shutter assemblies for many years in many cameras of course. 

Aside from the operational aspects, you may like to consider the dollars too.
In used lenses there tend to be more example available in the non-CS versions
You pay a premium for the CS shutter of course but maybe that also means that the lens remains more value later too?
 

[hkgmatt]

 

".....I don't intend to use my new S for strobe work, at least not principally."

OK but if you do some of the time ;-)

 

 

"Downsides on the other hand would be higher cost" Yep!

 

"higher weight penalty".... I don't think that the central shutter adds significant weight. It has dictated the volume to some extent in the initial design,however the barrel dimensions are the same for both versions of course

 

"and I am wondering too if there is a deficit in reliability, given the simple rule that the more electronic gubbins and moving parts inside a lens there more there is to go wrong at some point. This is an electronically governed leaf shutter motor after all, not some Copal thing from the '60s.".....possibly, at least I'm not aware of reports regarding shutter reliability. The initial design from an outside provider ended up being supplanted by something from Leica Camera themselves. As was explained by alberio_double, the focal plane shutter always operated as well in any case. But Copal have provided millions of shutter assemblies for many years in many cameras of course. 

Aside from the operational aspects, you may like to consider the dollars too.

In used lenses there tend to be more example available in the non-CS versions

You pay a premium for the CS shutter of course but maybe that also means that the lens remains more value later too?

 

 

 

+1

 

I chose all of my S lenses in CS version except the 24mm which isn't available as CS and the 35mm which I thought I'd never need in a studio setting. Something I promptly regretted when I shot with strobes one day and wanted to use the 35mm.

 

Value retention was a consideration too. The additional price and weight is quickly forgotten. When you need it you need it. The lack of a CS version is what holds me back from buying the zoom. As for reliability, ironically it is the non-CS 35mm which is the first and so far only S lens to fail on me - broken autofocus, which I appreciate has nothing to do with the shutter type.

 

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very useful replies here - thank you.

[DMarc]

It seems most users choose the CS lenses when they need faster flash sync rates than the regular focal plane versions, and are willing to pay the premium for that.

 

But I wondered if there are other advantages and disadvantages to consider. I don't intend to use my new S for strobe work, at least not principally. But it crossed my mind that there might be an advantage in leaf shutter exposure in gaining a stop or two in hand-holdability, due to the lose of mirror slap. Have I got that right? (I guess it is also a quite way to work, right?)

 

Downsides on the other hand would be higher cost, higher weight penalty, and I am wondering too if there is a deficit in reliability, given the simple rule that the more electronic gubbins and moving parts inside a lens there more there is to go wrong at some point. This is an electronically governed leaf shutter motor after all, not some Copal thing from the '60s.

 

Has anyone faced this dilemma and gone for CS for reasons other than flash sync?

 

I guess taking my new S into a Leica store and trying two versions side by side would answer some of this too...

 

Thanks.

I find the CS lenses to be much more flexible in studio with strobes. Might be possible to sync at 1/125, as indicated in the first answer, but you would then have to significantly stop the lens down and lose flexibility on your choice of depth of field. This is the reason why I have not yet bought the 100mm and am using a Hasselblad 100mm.

If you can afford it, I'd sure recommend you to buy the CS versions you would expect to use with strobes.

The alternative is to use filters.

[John McMaster]

In a controlled situation like that, put the flash power down or use ND filters? Outside fill flash is where I thought they would be of most use.......

 

john

[ynp]

I find the CS lenses to be much more flexible in studio with strobes. Might be possible to sync at 1/125, as indicated in the first answer, but you would then have to significantly stop the lens down and lose flexibility on your choice of depth of field. This is the reason why I have not yet bought the 100mm and am using a Hasselblad 100mm.

If you can afford it, I'd sure recommend you to buy the CS versions you would expect to use with strobes.

The alternative is to use filters.

Maybe I misunderstood your point and you are talking about the strobe work outside, where balancing the ambient with flash is important. Or you are shooting with the combination of strobes and hot lights in the studio.

 

As I understand, most probably mistakable, the aperture is important for the studio controlled strobe work environment. The shutter speed is irrelevant, if you are not dragging the shutter.

 

The majority of modern studio shooters use their Canons/Nikons happily and do not care about syncing at 1/1000. My Sinar-M syncs at 1/100 and it's a studio camera.

 

Yevgeny

Edited August 9, 2015 by ynp

[albireo_double]

Might be possible to sync at 1/125, as indicated in the first answer, but you would then have to significantly stop the lens down and lose flexibility on your choice of depth of field. 

 

Whether this is a problem depends on what you are shooting and what lens you use: for instance, in a typical portrait situation, if you shoot with a longer lens (e.g. the 180 mm in the S system or a 70-200mm zoom at some intermediate setting with a Nikon/Canon), you get very thin DOF with the lens wide open. Personally, I don't like the resulting "look" and the risk of not nailing focus and I usually stop the lens down to f8-16 to get both eyes sharp. The shallow DOF inherent in the long focal length achieves the desired subject separation for me and I don't have to rely on a large aperture to achieve it. As Yevgeny says, most pros today are Nikon or Canon shooters and happily sync at 1/125s in the studio (it helps to darken the studio to minimise ambient light). In this scenario, it is not necessary to use a CS lens. Of course, people shoot in different ways and may appreciate the CS lens even in a studio setting, as Marc does....but the key point is that the CS feature is there to control ambient light while shooting with strobes.  

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Windemonium,

 

One aspect of a between the lens shutter that has not been mentioned so far is:

 

When a photo of a moving object (ie: A passing car) is taken with a focal plane shutter set to a shutter speed which is higher than the shutter sync speed:

 

The actual speed at which the the photo is taken is the shutter sync speed.

 

This means:

 

 If the sync speed is slower than the set speed then at least part, if not all, of the captured image may show a degree of motion blur reflective of the sync speed. At least part of the photo will not have the action stopping effect of the (higher) set speed.

 

 Also:

 

With a focal plane shutter: This (ie: Passing car's final image in a print) may also: Show part of the image leaning forward. Or: Part of the image leaning backward. Or: Part of the image compressed. Or: Part of the image expanded. Dependent on camera orientation.

 

With a between the lens shutter the image, whether there is motion blur or not, will not be tilted or compressed or expanded. The motion stopping ability of the shutter speed will be the shutter speed set. Regardless of what the sync speed is.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[dritz]

Hello Windemonium,

 

One aspect of a between the lens shutter that has not been mentioned so far is:

 

When a photo of a moving object (ie: A passing car) is taken with a focal plane shutter set to a shutter speed which is higher than the shutter sync speed:

 

The actual speed at which the the photo is taken is the shutter sync speed.

 

This means:

 

 If the sync speed is slower than the set speed then at least part, if not all, of the captured image may show a degree of motion blur reflective of the sync speed. At least part of the photo will not have the action stopping effect of the (higher) set speed.

 

 Also:

 

With a focal plane shutter: This (ie: Passing car's final image in a print) may also: Show part of the image leaning forward. Or: Part of the image leaning backward. Or: Part of the image compressed. Or: Part of the image expanded. Dependent on camera orientation.

 

With a between the lens shutter the image, whether there is motion blur or not, will not be tilted or compressed or expanded. The motion stopping ability of the shutter speed will be the shutter speed set. Regardless of what the sync speed is.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

 

The perfect example from Jacques Henri Lartigue

[peterv]

Besides all the valid points about the advantages of the CS lenses that have been mentioned, there's one other thing I personally like to consider and that is a possibility that in the future a FPS may not be needed in case a picture is taken directly from live view mode.

With the mirror already up, the shutter already open and the use of EFC, one would only need the CS to stop the exposure. I guess that for such use of the CS there might be a limit to shutter speed, though I'm not sure.

 

This would speed up the exposure sequence and, more importantly, eliminate mirror and shutter shake. Besides that there'd also be the advantage of the camera being considerably less loud and produce far less sound, which could be marketed as a traditional Leica advantage.

 

If this is technically viable, I do not know. But I'd think this might be another future advantage of the CS lenses. I brought this up on another forum more than a year ago hoping that this could be implemented in the 007, but somehow my point got lost and I gave up. Still, if the smart technicians of the S system could make this possible, that'd be great.

Edited August 13, 2015 by peterv

[jbl]

I have a non-S MF system (the phase one) and I had a case just a couple of days ago where the leaf shutter was amazingly helpful. I don’t do a ton of strobe work, but I ended up doing some outside and being able to wirelessly sync at 1/1000s without having to even think about it, made the whole thing a lot easier.

 

Irrespective of that, one thing to think about is that a focal-plane shutter sync of 1/125s isn’t actually that fast when you’re dealing with a medium-format sensor. Many people have told me that a shutter speed of 1/(2x the focal length) is the minimum and I try and stay above 1/200s. Absent the whole issue of overpowering the sun, there’s still the fundamental issue that 1/125s isn’t that fast of a shutter speed. I have two young children and i’m up near 1/250s on my M’s just to keep the movement under control.

 

-jbl