Nikon Df Shutter problem...........here we go again

[GrahamS]

I read this today and wonder if Nikon should find another shutter supplier:

http://photographylife.com/nikon-df-...sue#more-67510

[JR1]

Am I surprised, no god help me when I get the D4s

[Shadowman]

It would have been more nice to see the exif data with the shots provided.

[inkista]

Uh... did you read the update at the top of the article? It's not the shutter mechanism on the camera. It's the cycling of the lights in the scene.

[pnodrog]

Not the camera but the person behind the camera being ignorant about AC current and power factor theory. He used an exposure of 1/400sec which will be subject to a lot of exposure variation from the lighting source. At 1/50th or 1/60th depending on AC frequency it should be a very consistent exposure.

[Shadowman]

Now can the readers of his magazine retract all of their commentary below the article?

[inkista]

Now can the readers of his magazine retract all of their commentary below the article?

No, because the comments is how he figured it out.

[Shadowman]

No, because the comments is how he figured it out.

True, just place a "never mind" sticker on the negative comments.

[pnodrog]

I had only glanced at the beginning of the article in light of the heading for this post. Going back to look at the comments I now see it is all well explained.

Pretty sure the article has been updated since I first saw it?

[Manfred M]

It's nice to see that he finally figured it out (with some help), but some of the other comments on the blog are unfortunately all to common on what one reads on photography blogs; people showing their ignorance on the subject of cameras and photography.

The nice thing about CiC is that those types seem to have avoided joining.

[AB26]

Graham,

Your link takes me to an article written by Nasim Mansurov. It is a Tutorial on Light Frequency Issues.
If worth anything, I have to place a big question mark over the competence of Nasim Mansurov as a camera reviewer.

Got no idea where your link was supposed to take me but there is nothing about a Nikon Df “shutter problem” that I can see.

Seems to have been a big IBM fault (Idiot Behind Machine). GET TO KNOW THE EQUIPMENT YOU USE!!!!!!

[RustBeltRaw]

The nice thing about CiC is that those types seem to have avoided joining.

Of course they have. We use complete sentences and numbers here.

Seems to have been a big IBM fault (Idiot Behind Machine). GET TO KNOW THE EQUIPMENT YOU USE!!!!!!

The sad part is that this isn't an equipment problem, even though those are everywhere with people who don't read the freakin' manual. This problem would occur regardless of what camera the gentleman used, so it shows a more troubling, general misunderstanding.

Can I ask why a guy with the means to afford a Df and run a well-trafficked blog didn't know about this already?

[Manfred M]

Can I ask why a guy with the means to afford a Df and run a well-trafficked blog didn't know about this already?

Back in the high school days, there were two groups of people who got into photography.

There were the "techies" who enjoyed understanding the technical side of photgraphy, understanding the mechanics and physiscs of how cameras, lenses and meters worked. In those days, we also tended to have a good chemistry background with all of the wet darkroom work.

The other group were the "artists" who were quite into making "art"; i.e. taking pictures of doors and the like and would come to us techies to figure out why their pictures were not working out..

At the end of high school, the bulk of us "techies" stayed in photography as a hobby and most of us went off to study techie stuff, like engineering. A few of the "artists" went off and did photography diplomas, and eventually did develop a fairly good understanding of what we "techies" knew; but still did not understand the underlying physics.

I do remember to talking to a couple of them after graduation and trying to explain the green spike in fluorescent lighting and the impact of the 60 Hz / rapid decay of light from the phosphors and their eyes glazed over as they always had...

Jump forward a few decades and with the switch from "constant light" tungsten Christmas lights to LED, so it's not particularly surprising that a certain subset of photographers were caught off guard (again).

[Glenn NK]

I made a comment (post No.13) about why the OP shouldn't take too much advice on what lens to buy (Newbie need Camera/Lens recommendations). Newbie needs Camera/Lense recommendations

Then I see the Df "shutter problem" blog by an expert that suggests that a "bit" of scrutiny should be applied to "information" posted by bloggers.

This phenomenon has been discussed for at least seven years on forums (the length or my foray into digital), and by now I thought it was well known - wrong again.

Glenn

[Shadowman]

It's always a good idea to look more closely at any recommendation, supporting data goes a long way.

[JR1]

It's nice to see that he finally figured it out (with some help), but some of the other comments on the blog are unfortunately all to common on what one reads on photography blogs; people showing their ignorance on the subject of cameras and photography.

The nice thing about CiC is that those types seem to have avoided joining.

"ignorance" or lack of knowledge, we are none of us 100% proficient in all aspects of photography, surely

[RustBeltRaw]

"ignorance" or lack of knowledge, we are none of us 100% proficient in all aspects of photography, surely

True, but that's why we're here asking questions instead of crying wolf in our blogs.

[Nasim Mansurov]

Guys,

This is Nasim, the guy who wrote about the Df shutter issue. After I researched the issue more and received feedback from our readers, I realized that I posted about the problem without fully understanding the cause of the issue. It turns out that artificial light can result in huge variations in exposure at fast shutter speeds above 1/125. I have seen flicker issues before, but this particular case was odd, because the image was very dark. Either way, I stand corrected and I wanted to apologize in front of everyone that read the original article.

Please remember that I am a human and I make mistakes. This was a good lesson learned, so I re-wrote the article with a different title and content for those that might encounter a similar/same issue in artificial light.

Thank you for understanding.


Sincerely,
Nasim
http://photographylife.com

[RustBeltRaw]

Please remember that I am a human and I make mistakes.

True. I am much less concerned about a technical mistake than a lot of the copyright and integrity issues out there, and I'm glad your concern for your reputation and accuracy is sufficient to seek out these discussions and make your case.

You have my respect, sir. I look forward to your next article.

[Manfred M]

Hi Nasim - I can't even begin to list the dumb things I have done in photography (and in other fields). The one common thread is that in general, the product worked as designed, but I just didn't use it properly.

That being said, going in with that knowledge and analysing the situation, I can usually figure out what went wrong and can take corrective actions. Perhaps the only place where my "rule" does not apply 100% of the time is with software; and this of course controls so very many things today...