Let's talk about noise.

JohnWolf said:
I tried this with my M6 and M246. On Google Play there are so many apps named "Sound Meter" that I have no idea if it's the same as Pan used.

The M6 varied a lot by how quickly I pressed the shutter button. The Mono measurements was much more consistent.

My very unscientific findings, at 1m and 500 shutter speed:

M6 - 55 db
M246 - 46 db

However, I completely lost confidence in my testing when I clocked my Nikkormat at 57.5 db. The thing sounds like a car door slamming.

John
Click to expand...

Some meters have a response setting. If you are only seeing a tiny difference it is probably in a slow response mode where fast transient noises won't really be measured accurately.

Shawn
 
All I can say is so much for Leica pushing the idea their cameras are so quiet after seeing the IIc wind up being the loudest camera of the bunch. I would think if you really wanted to measure the sound levels you would build an enclosure lined with sound cone foam, and do all your testing in there so no ambient noises could pollute the results.

PF
 
farlymac said:
All I can say is so much for Leica pushing the idea their cameras are so quiet after seeing the IIc wind up being the loudest camera of the bunch.
Click to expand...

This got me thinking; I have a IIIg, If and IIIf that should all be functionally the same, but sound very different. The IIIg's shutter sounds soft and almost whisper quiet, the If is a little bit louder than that, and the IIIf has sounded like a sharp clap ever since it was last serviced in 2016 (I think the shutter may have been over-tensioned to get it running to spec).

So I set up a test with a Zoom H1 audio recorder stood on a table and all three cameras positioned around it, lenses removed, the lens mount on each camera positioned exactly 30cm from the microphone on the recorder, and each shutter set to 1/500.

Then I took the audio file and uploaded it to https://www.misha.studio/waveformer/ to produce a graphic representation of the audio.

This is the result (with a bit of editing to increase the height of the wave forms - equally, of course! - and close the gaps between them for easier comparison):

waveform-1645838056552-1_03.png

The difference is basically nominal, but it is there - and it definitely seems much greater with the camera right next to your face. I suspect that if the IIIf was re-serviced and the shutter tension was bought down, it'd be more in line with the IIIg.

Also, I'm now kicking myself that I didn't dig out a Pentax MX and a big clunky Zenit to produce comparative waveforms for those!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom