Miamark Loc: Florida

Shutter priority came after aperture priority and neither replaced the other.

User ID

Yet another typical UHH historical photo authority. In real world history, shutter priority came first (1965).

In certain brands, aperture priority came first cuz its simpler to make, but despite greater complexity, shutter priority came before aperture priority.

Miamark Loc: Florida

I think that the Chicken came first. In my Pentaxes and Nikon’s aperture priority came first example, Nikon FE and Nikon FE 2. In any event, I do not want want to get too far off topic.

User ID

Please dont generalize based on narrow limited personal experience. Thank you.

jcboy3

I think shutter priority came much earlier than 1965. The Kodak Super 6-20 c. 1938 had shutter priority automatic exposure:

"The world's first series-production auto exposure (AE) still camera, the Kodak Super Six-20 was nearly 20 years ahead of its time, but it nevertheless exerted a profound influence on camera makers as a technological benchmark. With advances in electronics and metering technology, the concept of auto exposure took the photographic world by storm after World War II, and was ultimately developed into today's sophisticated, through the lens, multi-pattern, multi-mode auto exposure systems. Understandably, Kodak introduced the Super Six-20 with considerable fanfare at the then staggering price of $225 (about half the price of a new 1938 Ford). A strikingly handsome folding roll film camera of futuristic post-deco clamshell design, it produced eight 2 1/4 x 3 1/4“ images per roll of 620 film and featured a front-cell-focusing Tessar-formula Kodak Anastigmat Special 100mm f/3.5 lens plus a giant 33/4 x 3/4" selenium cell under a metal "awning" just below the rangefinder and separate viewfinder. On the left side of the front standard, there's a manual-override aperture scale calibrated from f/3.5 to f/22. Set it to the unmarked "automatic" setting past the f/22 mark and you can see a little comb-toothed bar. As you press the right-hand shutter-release slide inward, a moving needle (which is coupled to the three-bladed iris diaphragm) becomes trapped between the teeth on the bar. Thus, Kodak originated the trapped-needle system of automatic aperture control that was used (in refined form) on many later shutter-priority AE cameras. This system had its limitations: It was based on a single film speed (ASA 32); only worked with shutter speeds from 1/25 to 1/200 sec (though the Super Six-20's Kodak-made leaf shutter has speeds down to 1 second); did not do well in dim light; and was no paragon of reliability. Considering its limitations, Kodak's engineers wisely designed a complete range of manual control options into the camera. The lens, which focuses down to 4 ft, is capable of very sharp results. Fewer than (1000) Kodak Super Six-20s cameras had been built when the camera went out of production in '45, and while it was a great image builder that demonstrated Kodak's technological prowess, it was not a great sales success. Today, the Kodak Super Six-20 is a quintessential collectible verging on being a museum piece."

therwol Loc: USA

In the age of mechanical shutters, with timing controlled by gears and spring tension, it was easier to design a mechanism to control a lens diaphragm based on the voltage coming out of a light meter. I was thinking about this. My father's 1960s Bell and Howell 8mm movie camera with auto exposure actually used shutter priority. The shutter speed was fixed at 1/18 sec. The aperture changed as the camera moved around and the brightness changed. You could see this was happening on the film because there would be a delay before the change took place.

Another camera that was well before its time was the Nikon FA. It was from the same era as the FE. It offered shutter priority, aperture priority and a program mode (as well as manual). All modes worked with every Nikon lens made to that point, which was remarkable because pre-AIs lenses didn't have calibrated diaphragms for auto exposure. They relied on a mechanical stop provided by the aperture ring. The FA took a second exposure reading after the lens was stopped down and compensated for any errors in the diaphragm on the older lenses. Unfortunately, the camera suffered from some reliability issues such as chip failure.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Thank you. You're politeness makes me think I've been rubbing off a bit.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I believe older auto-exposure models were shutter priority by default, not a shooting mode. The Canon AE-1 that predates the Nikon FE is an example. You only have a control for the shutterspeed and the camera decided the aperture. Same for the Canon F-1 from 1971, again, only a time control, but you could buy an add-on piece to make it aperture priority. I don't know other firm bodies from other brands from that time, only having used Canon cameras of that age.

therwol Loc: USA

Look at this contraption Nikon came up with to provide shutter priority auto exposure with the Nikon F2 camera. It literally moved the diaphragm ring on the lens.

https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf2/accessories/ds2/index.htm

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The operative word there is 'contraption.' Geez! All that for that?

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Not really cdayton...Looks like a "gain" but each to their own... Cheers!

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

I've looked at them all at B&H which I visit a few times a year (I'm in NYC)...Sony, Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, etc....they are all still peepholes. I think for higher end models EVFs should be interchangeable eye & waist level to accommodate the two preferences, as well as a hood option for a rear hi-res screen. Yes, camera designers are making cameras as if we are still in the film SLR era, regarding the peephole. Eye relief should be measured in cm not mm.

Bill McKenna

Great comments.

therwol Loc: USA

It reminds me of the vinyl era when vinyl pressings still sucked but a lot of money was put into research to improve turntables, tonearms and phono cartridges. For example there were belt drive and then direct drive turntables to replace those that used idler wheels with all of the rumble that they transmitted. Then there were parallel tracking tonearms. Then there were the ones with massive platters to reduce wow and flutter. In all cases, if you put on a record of the Jefferson Airplane, the sound sucked just as much. Vinyl pressings improved in the late 70s and 80s, and the best cost a lot of money, but it took digital to change the game and make the previous efforts to improve sound obsolete.

The F2 camera, as good as it was for an all metal, mechanical only camera, was stuck in an era. Without insulting people who still covet the best of these cameras, the next generation with the F3, FE, FA and beyond changed the game simply by having electronically controlled shutters, making auto exposure trivial to accomplish. Most people can only see the era they're stuck in. Visionaries may see beyond their era, but what they imagine has to be put into reality.

So here we are with the DSLR versus mirrorless debate. They've done everything they can with DSLRs. Some of them are still great cameras, but mirrorless offers new possibilities and will take over the industry, as it should.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

It boils down to personal choice. If you want, try using a mirrorless and a DSLR, each exclusively, for a couple days, weeks, months and see which you feel or see is better for your photography. When you have the results confirmed in your mind, go with that camera and don't look back.