Bye Bye mechanical apertures?

[ricktas]

Scientists have developed a chemical based camera aperture system. Gone are the mechanical aperture blades that have existed, with this new development. The new aperture is chemical based, inside glass and is reactive to electrical currents. No more moving parts.

This new glass aperture works in the same way as the human eye.

At present, the limitation of this new aperture is response time, it cannot compete with the current metal aperture for speed, but no doubt the scientists will be working to overcome that.

More info, here: http://www.news.net/article/1515622/...-iris?referid=

[ameerat42]

Rick. Shouldn't this be in F-stop

[ricktas]

Rick. Shouldn't this be in F-stop

It was..I created it in f-stop, then decided it was news, so moved it...HAHAHA

[mikew09]

That is amazing really. I see that there will be no stopping this ranging ahead. I imagine this will eventually allow for more compact and lightweight lens that can have any aperture as the limitation of the mechanical design of todays aperture will be removed.
Imagine and aperture that can be set to any size - the world of photography is about to cahnge.

[arthurking83]

Obviously there has to be a limit as to how large(open) it can be .. this is a limitation of the glass size.
But, depending on how it affects 'diffraction limitations' in that this is a dye based substance and hence much thinner than a mechanical iris ... we already have the ability to create a too small aperture size.

What would be interesting in future lenses(and of course cameras) using such a system would be that frames rates could be immensely increased, once they work out how to increase it's response times.

And if they could then fork the research side of things into development of truly electronic shutters(not the gaited electronic systems we have now) to replace mechanical shutter systems!!!
The sky could literally be the limit. No more flash sync speed limits .. etc, etc.

[aussie girl]

Can you imagine how this sort of technology could aid people with vision impairment if they can somehow, in the future, incorporate it into the human eye

[wayn0i]

It makes me wonder what cameras will look like in 10 years?????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bitsnpieces]

Would they look like a phone?

[Glen1]

For anyone who is mechanically minded, and has taken a lens apart, the aperture mechanism is a beautiful thing. As more of our originally mechanical cameras are replaced with mini-computers, it would be nice if the 'iris' of the lens could remain as a purely mechanical device, free of electrical interference. But then, I've been on the plonk.....

Regards
Glen1

[arthurking83]

..... But then, I've been on the plonk.....

Regards
Glen1

Yep! I reckon you have.

Oily, sticky, out of shape blades, inaccuracy(of reported and engaged size) .. etc, etc ... hopefully all aspects to be consigned to the scrapheap of history!

I'm not an engineer, or techie type person of any description .. but I've always wondered why no one has ever thought to replace aperture and/or shutter with a purely electronic type .. as an example in years gone by, with an LCD type screen thing or something like that.
Shutters(especially) seem like an obvious choice of a mechanical component that should have been replaced a long time ago.

Imagine a camera with basically no limitation on shutter sync speed if it were an electronic type(not gaited like some current and past cameras have had!).
A separate electronic shutter that could be completely vibration free.

Anyhow .. it's not that I'm against mechanical things per se .. in fact my choice of tertiary eduction was mechanical engineering! ... it's just that in cameras especially those that can require faster, more positive, more consistent operation and less wear and tear, it seems like such an obvious evolution.

errr .. then again, maybe I need a shot of plonk ... or two, too!

[mongo]

Mongo would be OK with the idea if they still provide for a aperture ring to be able to command the new device. However, that is never going to happen - already we have the pain in the a**e "G" lenses which have taken away that element of immediate control. Mongo does not expect the new device to be any different in its application that those lenses. One further step forward but two backward in Mongo's opinion.

That is why Mongo only drives manual cars - in case you had not noticed, he likes to be in control - not the car. Even the DSG gearbox Mrs Mongo's new car has is still a glorified manual which is automatically driven but it still allows you real manual control if you want it. The equivalent of this car's capabilities would be the new aperture device which can be controlled by an aperture ring. So, you see, there is precedent for progress and still be enjoyable to use. However, none of the designers will be on the ball enough to understand that concept and unfortunately, they will do away with the aperture ring.

[ricktas]

Mongo would be OK with the idea if they still provide for a aperture ring to be able to command the new device. However, that is never going to happen - already we have the pain in the a**e "G" lenses which have taken away that element of immediate control. Mongo does not expect the new device to be any different in its application that those lenses. One further step forward but two backward in Mongo's opinion.

That is why Mongo only drives manual cars - in case you had not noticed, he likes to be in control - not the car. Even the DSG gearbox Mrs Mongo's new car has is still a glorified manual which is automatically driven but it still allows you real manual control if you want it. The equivalent of this car's capabilities would be the new aperture device which can be controlled by an aperture ring. So, you see, there is precedent for progress and still be enjoyable to use. However, none of the designers will be on the ball enough to understand that concept and unfortunately, they will do away with the aperture ring.

how different is dialing an aperture in by turning a wheel on the lens as opposed to turning a wheel on the camera body? Not really any different to changing gears on the floor as opposed to changing gears on the column?

[arthurking83]

I find myself always manually controlling my auto gearbox's gear selection based on what gear I want it to be in!
an option to control the use of the clutch would also be nice in some instances too .. but I haven't had a manual car for nearly 5 years now.

how different is dialing an aperture in by turning a wheel on the lens as opposed to turning a wheel on the camera body? Not really any different to changing gears on the floor as opposed to changing gears on the column?

There is a slight nuance difference in controlling aperture on lens as opposed to via sub command wheel. I actually prefer the camera's command wheel anyhow, as it gives you more finely grained steps, and to do this via a mechanical control on the lens is not only much harder to achieve, but then will almost certainly create a durability issue.

As with Mongo, I like aperture control on lens too, but not for the purpose of controlling the lens when in normal use ... my reason is simply for those times when you want to use the lens in strange ways.
ie. remotely off the camera(eg. bellows/extension tubes) or reversed on camera or another lens ... and other such mountings.
You can't do this with G lenses unless an adapter of some type is available that could hold and control the aperture lever mechanism.

[mongo]

how different is dialing an aperture in by turning a wheel on the lens as opposed to turning a wheel on the camera body? Not really any different to changing gears on the floor as opposed to changing gears on the column?

it really depends Rick. There are only 2 wheels on your camera and you may have assigned other functions to them which you could not to the aperture ring. So, when this is the case, it is best (and most familiar) to use the aperture ring for its purpose and allocate other necessary functions to the front and back wheels on your camera.