E-P5 and "shtter Shock"

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 17,958Gear list
Like?
Re: Nothing wrong with debate
In reply to Andy Westlake, 11 months ago

Andy Westlake wrote:

Just to be clear, I have no objections to this discussion at all, but I can't spend all my time on this forum arguing my case - I have a job to do.

Hi Andy,

Good to hear that you don't object to discussing the matter here. Of course, I fully understand that you have other things to do and can't spend all your time responding to messages on the forum.

See some comments on what you say below.

So here's a quick summary of my thinking:

1) I think Anders is absolutely correct about way shutter shock is transmitted in Olympus cameras - I can see no evidence whatsoever that the shutter specifically vibrates to the sensor internally. The entire camera has to move (and, obviously, tilt). So the 'floating' IS system is not to blame.

I think we are in full agreement here.

2) I can see shutter shock on the E-P5 quite clearly, if I look hard enough. But I have to use a 40-150mm at 150mm on a 'wobbly' tripod to do so, and the shake pattern is distinctly different to what I see in handheld shooting. I can't see the same effect with ether the 60mm F2.8 Macro or the 45mm F1.8 at shutter speeds which give hand-held blurring.

Your experiences with tripod-based shooting with the E-P5 as described above are fully in line with what I'd expect based on my testing for shutter shock with other bodies. With really long FLs, I can see some blur due to shutter shock when shooting off a tripod but with shorter FLs, it's hard to see any clear signs of it (although some minor reduction of resolution is still conceivable and might be revealed by outright MTF tests).

3) When I can see shutter shock, it's absolutely reproducible shot-to-shot, as you'd predict.

Are you talking about hand-held or tripod-based shooting here? In tripod-based shooting, I'd expect a pretty high degree of a reproducibility, although I wouldn't go as far as saying it is perfect. In hand-held shooting, I certainly wouldn't.

But the handheld effect is both much larger in magnitude, and random in its occurrence - it affects perhaps 60% of shots using the 60mm macro at 1/160sec. I've done a *lot* of testing of camera shake and image stabilisation systems for all sorts of camera/lens combinations, and this is relatively high in my experience.

Again, none of this comes as a surprise to me. That's what I'd expect to see when shooting handheld with for example my 75/1.8 on the E-M5 as well. Note that I am not saying that the blur I can see is as prominent as the one you see when you test with the 60 macro on the E-P5. There's no way for me to even judge that of course. But I wouldn't really expect tack-sharp results with the 75/1.8 on the E-M5 at 1/160 in handheld shooting (unless I use this), although most shots might have "passable" sharpness.

4) Images that show blurring just don't look much different with or without IS enabled. To me, the simplest explanation is that the IS simply doesn't correct it, for whatever reason.

That would be my conclusion as well. My tentative explanation of why the IBIS system can't correct for shutter shock is that it is not fast enough to cope with the very fast camera movement we are presumably dealing with in this case.

My main point is still that the E-P5 really is different to the E-M5, in terms of image blurring when shooting hand-held. That is why we called it out in the review. Richard knows the E-M5 very well - he reviewed it - and I own one and use it for much of my personal shooting, so we're not lacking in perspective. Of course we both have a lot of experience across loads of cameras of many types.

I don't dispute that the E-P5 might behave differently than the E-M5 in some important ways. But my hypothesis would still be that the root cause is the same, i.e., shutter shock (blur due shutter movement) rather than something else.

I don't think that shutter-shock tests done on other cameras, however well-conducted, can be generalised across to everything else out there - I've shot with countless cameras over the six years I've been working for DPReview, and they all have different characteristics.

We can never take for granted that anything generalizes. Nevertheless, I find reason to think that the main mechanisms involved will turn out to be the same with the E-P5 as with the E-M5 although they do not (or seem not) to manifest themselves in exactly the same way.

I see no reason not to believe that such things as shutter button design and placement could influence camera movements, and the E-M5's has a much longer travel, and softer feel, than the E-P5's.

I too find no reason to dispute that shutter button design and placement might have an impact. However, what you said about your own test results in a prior post (i.e., that you see the same blur with the E-P5 when you shoot with as much as two-second self-release or anti-shock delay) rules out, to my mind, the possibility that it is the shock due to button-pressing that is the culprit. As far as I can see, there is no way the "shock" due to button-pressing could last as long as two seconds.

The good news, though, is that 1/8 sec anti-shock seems to fix the E-P5's shakes..

This is of course is good news although I suspect that closer scrutiny will/would reveal that some blur (due to later phases of shutter action than the first) remains, just as it does with the E-M5.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow