# Canon Patent Application: Shutter that minimizes shutter shock



## canonnews (Mar 10, 2022)

> As discovered by CanonNews, this is an interesting patent application. Shutter shock is a condition that mirrorless cameras are prone to have if they have a mechanical shutter, especially if they also have IBIS.
> Canon in this patent application talks about a floating shutter mechanism that would reduce or even eliminate shutter shock.
> 
> A prior patent application may have worked;
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## KirkD (Mar 10, 2022)

Reminds me of the vertical shutter on the old Canon EF camera in the 1970's. I have one of those and love the smooth slickness of the shutter.


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Mar 10, 2022)

Or just do what Nikon have done and get rid of the mechanical shutter. We can overcome the shortfalls now of electronic shutters.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 10, 2022)

Cool idea. 

Couple of observations: 
- Enlarging the image on the patent appear to show 14 lens contacts (RF mount)
- There are two different bodies used in the images, one looking a lot like an R5, and another looking quite small, with a disproportionately large mount for its size. That second, smaller body doesn't show the contacts to show what kind of mount it is. Canon has in the past dropped unintentional hints with patent illustrations, and other times, they appear just to be using existing art to illustrate a new idea that winds up appearing in a different form.

I wonder if this would be the weak point for shutter life, using a flexible material. Or, alternately, perhaps the lack of shock could extend the life of shutters.


----------



## hachu21 (Mar 10, 2022)

If you look at youtube high fps shutter video, I would bet on the latter.


----------



## Maximilian (Mar 10, 2022)

fascinating! 

Thanks for sharing @canonnews


----------



## Maximilian (Mar 10, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> ... Couple of observations: ...


Good eye! 
Will be interesting what shows up in the future.


----------



## David - Sydney (Mar 10, 2022)

Adam Shutter Bug said:


> Or just do what Nikon have done and get rid of the mechanical shutter. We can overcome the shortfalls now of electronic shutters.


Has Nikon been able to remove banding when using eShutter in indoor sports arenas? 
The R5's eShutter is great for outdoor usage (albeit with reduced bit depth) but not really usable under indoor lighting.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 11, 2022)

Major Apologies! I made a mistake reading the patent. the floating spring mechanism was the prior art. the current art is using electromagnets for controlling the shutter.

Suffering from jetlag is my excuse at the moment


----------



## Del Paso (Mar 11, 2022)

It's nice to see Canon innovate where it really matters!


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 11, 2022)

Adam Shutter Bug said:


> Or just do what Nikon have done and get rid of the mechanical shutter. We can overcome the shortfalls now of electronic shutters.


You can only do that with monstrously fast processors and stacked sensors. Stacked sensors are markably more expensive than traditional and BSI sensors.


----------



## Franklyok (Mar 11, 2022)

What ? No global shutter ? Canon is *******!


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Mar 12, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Has Nikon been able to remove banding when using eShutter in indoor sports arenas?
> The R5's eShutter is great for outdoor usage (albeit with reduced bit depth) but not really usable under indoor lighting.


There have been videos testing the shutter in these situations. While you couldn’t set a manual shutter readout speed the automatic readout showed no banding in concert flashing situations or indoor lighting.


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Mar 12, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> You can only do that with monstrously fast processors and stacked sensors. Stacked sensors are markably more expensive than traditional and BSI sensors.


So why not put the better sensor? For an R1 we already looking £7k so ditch the mechanical shutter. Get a proper sensor cover.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 12, 2022)

Adam Shutter Bug said:


> So why not put the better sensor? For an R1 we already looking £7k so ditch the mechanical shutter. Get a proper sensor cover.


This patent may be for the next R5/R6 or a upgraded RP. The R1 and R3 will be enjoying exclusive stacked sensors for the next 2-3 generations and in the mean time we will need improvements to the R5 mark 2, 3, and 4.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 14, 2022)

I wish they'd be pouring that money into a global shutter....and really advance things.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Mar 15, 2022)

Now if they could only minimize 'sticker shock'


----------



## canonnews (Mar 18, 2022)

cayenne said:


> I wish they'd be pouring that money into a global shutter....and really advance things.


Canon has tons and I mean tons of patents and patent applications with respects to global shutters.

But .. they are expensive. A shutter that minimizes shutter shock and a regular sensor may be a cheaper option for say, a 75MP landscape camera.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 18, 2022)

canonnews said:


> Canon has tons and I mean tons of patents and patent applications with respects to global shutters.
> 
> But .. they are expensive. A shutter that minimizes shutter shock and a regular sensor may be a cheaper option for say, a 75MP landscape camera.


Think GS will make its debut appearance in the R1 ?

cayenne


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 20, 2022)

Shutter shock seems to be a phenomenon that arrived with more robust vertical plane shutters. One of the biggest culprits was the original Nikon FM from 1979, an incredibly popular camera concept, but the early adoption of the Copal vertical plane metal shutter caused the whole camera to jump when the shutter fired. In retrospect I realise it caused me many sharpness issues. The situation was improved with the FM2. I think this was why at the time the professional 35mm cameras continued to use the horizontal curtain shutters despite the fact that it gave a slower flash sync speed, but shutter shock more almost non existent, and I realise now, decades too late, why I generally got sharper images with my Nikon F3 than I did with the original FM.
So the phenomenon isn’t just to do with mirrorless, but i haven’t heard of specifically IBIS making it worse.


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 20, 2022)

Sporgon said:


> Shutter shock seems to be a phenomenon that arrived with more robust vertical plane shutters. One of the biggest culprits was the original Nikon FM from 1979, an incredibly popular camera concept, but the early adoption of the Copal vertical plane metal shutter caused the whole camera to jump when the shutter fired. In retrospect I realise it caused me many sharpness issues. The situation was improved with the FM2. I think this was why at the time the professional 35mm cameras continued to use the horizontal curtain shutters despite the fact that it gave a slower flash sync speed, but shutter shock more almost non existent, and I realise now, decades too late, why I generally got sharper images with my Nikon F3 than I did with the original FM.
> So the phenomenon isn’t just to do with mirrorless, but i haven’t heard of specifically IBIS making it worse.


I notice shutter shock-like effects in the 1/60-1/200s range, which I strongly suspect is more an effect of the way Canon programs there ILIS/IBIS systems than it is an effect of mechanical resonance. But that's only with fully mechanical shutter, which is a mode I virtually never use, since I don't have EF/RF lenses faster than f/1.8.

My M6II is another story, that only has a fully mechanical shutter and not a well dampened one, you can feel the camera jumping when holding it loosely. Luckily my most used lens on that is the EF-M 32mm f/1.4, which has no IS that Canon programmed to make things worse


----------

