E-M1 shutter shock: finally I found it

[Anders W]

i have just ordered the FZ1000.. i bet that dosnt suffer from shutter shock.. i will test for it though when it gets here.. he he..

the LX100 dosnt the GM1/5 dosnt i am assuming the FZ1000 wont but i could be wrong.. you never know..

I think you can rest assured that the FZ1000 doesn't have a focal-plane shutter and therefore doesn't suffer from blur due to shutter shock.

 

[Helen]

i have just ordered the FZ1000.. i bet that dosnt suffer from shutter shock.. i will test for it though when it gets here.. he he..

the LX100 dosnt the GM1/5 dosnt i am assuming the FZ1000 wont but i could be wrong.. you never know..

trog

No, it doesn't (I have one) and I assume the LX100 wouldn't either - they both have in or behind-the-lens leaf shutters so it isn't an issue due to the totally different way they operate. The GM1/GM5 are unique amongst focal plane shuttered cameras with that quiet little stepper motor-driven shutter that doesn't have the spring-powered "thwack" of conventional focal planes.

Oops - sorry Anders! For some weird reason I couldn't see your post before I started mine, so I just repeated your words in a more verbose way! ;-)

 

[trog100]

of course this begs the question.. if "they" can make cameras that dont suffer from shutter shock why do they make so many that do.. lol..

trog

 

[Anders W]

i have just ordered the FZ1000.. i bet that dosnt suffer from shutter shock.. i will test for it though when it gets here.. he he..

the LX100 dosnt the GM1/5 dosnt i am assuming the FZ1000 wont but i could be wrong.. you never know..

trog

No, it doesn't (I have one) and I assume the LX100 wouldn't either - they both have in or behind-the-lens leaf shutters so it isn't an issue due to the totally different way they operate. The GM1/GM5 are unique amongst focal plane shuttered cameras with that quiet little stepper motor-driven shutter that doesn't have the spring-powered "thwack" of conventional focal planes.

Oops - sorry Anders! For some weird reason I couldn't see your post before I started mine, so I just repeated your words in a more verbose way! ;-)

Absolutely no problem!

 

[Guy Parsons]

of course this begs the question.. if "they" can make cameras that dont suffer from shutter shock why do they make so many that do.. lol..

trog

The camera market is in such a mess with manufacturers tripping over themselves and each other to bring the "latest and greatest" to the market that it follows that we are all the Beta testers for the camera industry. The sudden death of large areas of the industry due to smartphones has put the brakes on much of this enthusiasm to keep wasting money (waste with both makers and buyers).

When complaints build up enough then something may be done but it could take say, 2 years in the production cycle before a proper fix hits the market.

Meanwhile Olympus at least were always fully aware of the problem and provided the anti-shock feature from day one.

It's just that the manuals talked of "on microscopes and telescopes" as being the possible problem area and being shy about the fact that everyday photography could be blurred by shock.

My Oly E-300 DSLR also has anti-shock, but in that model it was mirror slap being the main culprit. Move on the lighter M4/3 bodies and suddenly the shutter is the culprit but the anti-shock feature has always been there to combat the problem.

Hells bells, why are these stupid shutter shock threads always happening when there has always been a perfectly reasonable way to avoid or lessen the problem?

If I were to be a true cynic I would say that Oly relied on the blurring effect of 2 axis IBIS to hide the shock in many cases, but when the much better 3/5 axis IBIS came along then they had to do something smart about the remaining mess due to shutter shock. From user experience they could see that not many were bothering to use the existing anti-shock settings as some maybe would complain about that 1/8 second delay (sigh) so the 0 second delay had to be invented with its only 1/40 sec delay.

Originally I had intended to only buy into M4/3 when the global shutter had arrived, but that was taking too long, so here we are talking about shutter shock over and over and over and over and over and over and over.........to infinity it seems...

Regards.... Guy

 

[bgalb]

This article is a bit long, but well worth the read. Even the most apparently objective scientists are not immune to this human failure.

 

[Prairie Pal]

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

That would be the logical thing to do if Olympus was 100% committed to education and photography advancement. Innovative company that they seem to be.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Where is Olympus with the "image diagnostic" firmware that warns the user when the camera has recorded a blurred image? Analyze the pixels warn the user if blur has occurred from camera shake or shutter shock. That gives me a chance to reshoot without deep chimping.

 

[XMN]

This article is a bit long, but well worth the read. Even the most apparently objective scientists are not immune to this human failure.

Very good indeed, i've heard of that theory before but in a different article (can't remember which), and the main ideia was precisely that people are more prone to radicalize their own ideias when faced with facts that contradict them, instead of changing their mind. Something like that.

 

[Steen Bay]

So, why not to extend this first curtain rule all over the range of shutter speed?

As you get faster than 1/320 sec then the shutter has done the exposure before the shake starts to cause significant problems. Once you get to say 1/2000 and faster it's only a slit passing over the sensor and its travel is all done before the shock intrudes.

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

The nearest that we have to perfect understanding of the problem is CrisPhoto's totally excellent post at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53456685 where his CRO traces tell us the timing of the shock.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Apart from the fact that the blur due to shutter shock is reduced when the shutter speed becomes sufficiently high, one other reason for not using the EFCS (0-second AS) above flash sync speed is that it becomes more difficult to implement correctly beyond that point. In order for the EFCS to work right, the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame must match the movement of the second mechanical curtain or the exposure will not be even across the frame. What makes this a bit complicated is that what must be matched is not the movement of the second curtain itself but rather the shadow it casts on the sensor.

The latter, in turn, depends on the lens and the FL and f-stop at which it is used. So to have the EFCS work with precision, the body must know certain things about the lens and then use this information to control the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame. When implementing the 0-second AS, Oly has in all likelihood not bothered to work this out. This doesn't matter much as long as the shutter speed is at flash sync or below since the error will be of marginal size. When, however, you go above flash sync, and the shutter forms a slit without ever being completely upon across the entire frame, it becomes of increasing importance.

Two MFT cameras that in all likelihood do take the lens parameters into account when using the EFCS is the GM1 and GM5, neither of which has a mechanical first curtain and therefore always uses EFCS when the mechanical shutter is employed. Since the second curtain of these cameras moves slowly (flash sync is only 1/50 s), the timing of the first versus second curtain becomes a practical problem much earlier than with the Oly bodies that use an EFCS. Consequently, the GM1 and GM5 don't even allow use of the mechanical shutter unless the lens is electrically connected and the relevant lens parameters thus known. For MF lenses, only the purely electronic shutter is operative with these bodies.

I found it a bit surprising that SS was so clearly visible at 1/500 and 1/640 sec in this test/comparison :

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55121948

 

[trog100]

"everyday photography could be affected by it"

i am afraid "could be" are the wrong words i can take a high end camera fit an expensive lens shoot at certain (common) shutter speeds and produce unacceptable blurred images (no fault of my own) every time.. i can do this without fail..

the bottom line is the products i have been sold are in essence defective.. all in all a remarkable situation.. maybe an "unbelievable" situation which is maybe why it goes on and so many people refuse to see the situation for what it really is..

i bought into the M43 system a few years back.. a G3 with its 14-42 kit lens and a 45-200 lens.. what i bought worked okay and still does..

recently i had a buying spree and bought a whole new bunch of M43 gear.. this does not work okay.. i spend a fair bit of money.. would i have spent this money knowing what i know now.. no i would not or to be more accurate some of the things i unknowingly bought i would not have bought.. my choice of new camera gear would have been different..

i think the makers have committed themselves well in advance to a system that has problems that short term they cannot do anything about except pretend isnt there.. pretty much like the emperor did with his new suit.. the crowd has been fooled.. they see what they want to see..

trog

 

[XMN]

"everyday photography could be affected by it"

i am afraid "could be" are the wrong words i can take a high end camera fit an expensive lens shoot at certain (common) shutter speeds and produce unacceptable blurred images (no fault of my own) every time.. i can do this without fail..

the bottom line is the products i have been sold are in essence defective.. all in all a remarkable situation.. maybe an "unbelievable" situation which is maybe why it goes on and so many people refuse to see the situation for what it really is..

i bought into the M43 system a few years back.. a G3 with its 14-42 kit lens and a 45-200 lens.. what i bought worked okay and still does..

recently i had a buying spree and bought a whole new bunch of M43 gear.. this does not work okay.. i spend a fair bit of money.. would i have spent this money knowing what i know now.. no i would not or to be more accurate some of the things i unknowingly bought i would not have bought.. my choice of new camera gear would have been different..

i think the makers have committed themselves well in advance to a system that has problems that short term they cannot do anything about except pretend isnt there.. pretty much like the emperor did with his new suit.. the crowd has been fooled.. they see what they want to see..

trog

I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to...

 

[Anders W]

So, why not to extend this first curtain rule all over the range of shutter speed?

As you get faster than 1/320 sec then the shutter has done the exposure before the shake starts to cause significant problems. Once you get to say 1/2000 and faster it's only a slit passing over the sensor and its travel is all done before the shock intrudes.

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

The nearest that we have to perfect understanding of the problem is CrisPhoto's totally excellent post at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53456685 where his CRO traces tell us the timing of the shock.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Apart from the fact that the blur due to shutter shock is reduced when the shutter speed becomes sufficiently high, one other reason for not using the EFCS (0-second AS) above flash sync speed is that it becomes more difficult to implement correctly beyond that point. In order for the EFCS to work right, the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame must match the movement of the second mechanical curtain or the exposure will not be even across the frame. What makes this a bit complicated is that what must be matched is not the movement of the second curtain itself but rather the shadow it casts on the sensor.

The latter, in turn, depends on the lens and the FL and f-stop at which it is used. So to have the EFCS work with precision, the body must know certain things about the lens and then use this information to control the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame. When implementing the 0-second AS, Oly has in all likelihood not bothered to work this out. This doesn't matter much as long as the shutter speed is at flash sync or below since the error will be of marginal size. When, however, you go above flash sync, and the shutter forms a slit without ever being completely upon across the entire frame, it becomes of increasing importance.

Two MFT cameras that in all likelihood do take the lens parameters into account when using the EFCS is the GM1 and GM5, neither of which has a mechanical first curtain and therefore always uses EFCS when the mechanical shutter is employed. Since the second curtain of these cameras moves slowly (flash sync is only 1/50 s), the timing of the first versus second curtain becomes a practical problem much earlier than with the Oly bodies that use an EFCS. Consequently, the GM1 and GM5 don't even allow use of the mechanical shutter unless the lens is electrically connected and the relevant lens parameters thus known. For MF lenses, only the purely electronic shutter is operative with these bodies.

I found it a bit surprising that SS was so clearly visible at 1/500 and 1/640 sec in this test/comparison :

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55121948

I am a bit surprised at that too. I haven't tested a whole lot with the E-M1 and the 75-300 I use these days (my 100-300 is on my list of things to sell) above the 1/320 border-line where 0-second AS stops working. But I haven't spontaneously encountered any signs of problems and my rule of thumb with the 100-300 on my E-M5 was that shutter speeds like 1/500 and 1/640 would be safe from an SS point of view.

 

[secretworld]

So, why not to extend this first curtain rule all over the range of shutter speed?

As you get faster than 1/320 sec then the shutter has done the exposure before the shake starts to cause significant problems. Once you get to say 1/2000 and faster it's only a slit passing over the sensor and its travel is all done before the shock intrudes.

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

The nearest that we have to perfect understanding of the problem is CrisPhoto's totally excellent post at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53456685 where his CRO traces tell us the timing of the shock.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Apart from the fact that the blur due to shutter shock is reduced when the shutter speed becomes sufficiently high, one other reason for not using the EFCS (0-second AS) above flash sync speed is that it becomes more difficult to implement correctly beyond that point. In order for the EFCS to work right, the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame must match the movement of the second mechanical curtain or the exposure will not be even across the frame. What makes this a bit complicated is that what must be matched is not the movement of the second curtain itself but rather the shadow it casts on the sensor.

The latter, in turn, depends on the lens and the FL and f-stop at which it is used. So to have the EFCS work with precision, the body must know certain things about the lens and then use this information to control the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame. When implementing the 0-second AS, Oly has in all likelihood not bothered to work this out. This doesn't matter much as long as the shutter speed is at flash sync or below since the error will be of marginal size. When, however, you go above flash sync, and the shutter forms a slit without ever being completely upon across the entire frame, it becomes of increasing importance.

Two MFT cameras that in all likelihood do take the lens parameters into account when using the EFCS is the GM1 and GM5, neither of which has a mechanical first curtain and therefore always uses EFCS when the mechanical shutter is employed. Since the second curtain of these cameras moves slowly (flash sync is only 1/50 s), the timing of the first versus second curtain becomes a practical problem much earlier than with the Oly bodies that use an EFCS. Consequently, the GM1 and GM5 don't even allow use of the mechanical shutter unless the lens is electrically connected and the relevant lens parameters thus known. For MF lenses, only the purely electronic shutter is operative with these bodies.

I found it a bit surprising that SS was so clearly visible at 1/500 and 1/640 sec in this test/comparison :

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55121948

I am a bit surprised at that too. I haven't tested a whole lot with the E-M1 and the 75-300 I use these days (my 100-300 is on my list of things to sell) above the 1/320 border-line where 0-second AS stops working. But I haven't spontaneously encountered any signs of problems and my rule of thumb with the 100-300 on my E-M5 was that shutter speeds like 1/500 and 1/640 would be safe from an SS point of view.

I have, with my GX7 and now sold Oly 40-150. Shutter shock up to 1/600 (and even higher) when beyond 90mm. Strangely my new Pana 45-150 doesn't suffer at all at high speeds. I have not tested in the 1/160 range yet but that is also out of hand holding range (maybe doable with ois).

 

[Anders W]

So, why not to extend this first curtain rule all over the range of shutter speed?

As you get faster than 1/320 sec then the shutter has done the exposure before the shake starts to cause significant problems. Once you get to say 1/2000 and faster it's only a slit passing over the sensor and its travel is all done before the shock intrudes.

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

The nearest that we have to perfect understanding of the problem is CrisPhoto's totally excellent post at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53456685 where his CRO traces tell us the timing of the shock.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Apart from the fact that the blur due to shutter shock is reduced when the shutter speed becomes sufficiently high, one other reason for not using the EFCS (0-second AS) above flash sync speed is that it becomes more difficult to implement correctly beyond that point. In order for the EFCS to work right, the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame must match the movement of the second mechanical curtain or the exposure will not be even across the frame. What makes this a bit complicated is that what must be matched is not the movement of the second curtain itself but rather the shadow it casts on the sensor.

The latter, in turn, depends on the lens and the FL and f-stop at which it is used. So to have the EFCS work with precision, the body must know certain things about the lens and then use this information to control the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame. When implementing the 0-second AS, Oly has in all likelihood not bothered to work this out. This doesn't matter much as long as the shutter speed is at flash sync or below since the error will be of marginal size. When, however, you go above flash sync, and the shutter forms a slit without ever being completely upon across the entire frame, it becomes of increasing importance.

Two MFT cameras that in all likelihood do take the lens parameters into account when using the EFCS is the GM1 and GM5, neither of which has a mechanical first curtain and therefore always uses EFCS when the mechanical shutter is employed. Since the second curtain of these cameras moves slowly (flash sync is only 1/50 s), the timing of the first versus second curtain becomes a practical problem much earlier than with the Oly bodies that use an EFCS. Consequently, the GM1 and GM5 don't even allow use of the mechanical shutter unless the lens is electrically connected and the relevant lens parameters thus known. For MF lenses, only the purely electronic shutter is operative with these bodies.

I found it a bit surprising that SS was so clearly visible at 1/500 and 1/640 sec in this test/comparison :

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55121948

I am a bit surprised at that too. I haven't tested a whole lot with the E-M1 and the 75-300 I use these days (my 100-300 is on my list of things to sell) above the 1/320 border-line where 0-second AS stops working. But I haven't spontaneously encountered any signs of problems and my rule of thumb with the 100-300 on my E-M5 was that shutter speeds like 1/500 and 1/640 would be safe from an SS point of view.

I have, with my GX7 and now sold Oly 40-150. Shutter shock up to 1/600 (and even higher) when beyond 90mm. Strangely my new Pana 45-150 doesn't suffer at all at high speeds. I have not tested in the 1/160 range yet but that is also out of hand holding range (maybe doable with ois).

Yes. I think we talked about that already in another thread. Based on the reports I see (and to some extent my own experiences as well), the Oly 40-150 appears to be particularly vulnerable from an SS point of view. It could be that this lens is prone to internal displacements of one kind or another when subjected to the shock.

 

[trog100]

"I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to."

i cant get used to this forum software i use the flat view or whatever its called and just post on the end of what i see.. it quite clearly dosnt fit in with threaded view.. he he

the rest of the forum world seems to have moved on dpreview dosnt.. i dont like the threaded view but dont want to appear to be replying to any particular individual when i am not.. i dont see much of a way around it though unless i am missing something.. if i am i would be happy to be clued in..

trog

 

[Anders W]

"I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to."

i cant get used to this forum software i use the flat view or whatever its called and just post on the end of what i see.. it quite clearly dosnt fit in with threaded view.. he he

the rest of the forum world seems to have moved on dpreview dosnt.. i dont like the threaded view but dont want to appear to be replying to any particular individual when i am not.. i dont see much of a way around it though unless i am missing something.. if i am i would be happy to be clued in..

Even if you view the thread in flat rather than threaded view, just make sure to push reply on the post you want to reply to rather than on the last post in the thread.

 

[secretworld]

So, why not to extend this first curtain rule all over the range of shutter speed?

As you get faster than 1/320 sec then the shutter has done the exposure before the shake starts to cause significant problems. Once you get to say 1/2000 and faster it's only a slit passing over the sensor and its travel is all done before the shock intrudes.

It would be nice if Olympus or somebody who can test all this stuff properly could tell us exactly what goes on and the timing involved.

The nearest that we have to perfect understanding of the problem is CrisPhoto's totally excellent post at http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53456685 where his CRO traces tell us the timing of the shock.

His shots are at 1/25 second, so to see the effect at 1/125 second we have to refer to only the first 20% of the CRO trace from the left, and surprise surprise, that is where the major shock component is lurking.

At say 1/2000 sec then only the first 1.25% of the trace would be the exposure timing, that happens before the bump of the shutter shock starts to have an effect.

The downside of 0sec anti-shock is the 25mS delay before the exposure starts, which may disturb some overly sensitive souls here. So maybe that's one reason why it is disabled above 1/320 sec.

Regards...... Guy

Apart from the fact that the blur due to shutter shock is reduced when the shutter speed becomes sufficiently high, one other reason for not using the EFCS (0-second AS) above flash sync speed is that it becomes more difficult to implement correctly beyond that point. In order for the EFCS to work right, the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame must match the movement of the second mechanical curtain or the exposure will not be even across the frame. What makes this a bit complicated is that what must be matched is not the movement of the second curtain itself but rather the shadow it casts on the sensor.

The latter, in turn, depends on the lens and the FL and f-stop at which it is used. So to have the EFCS work with precision, the body must know certain things about the lens and then use this information to control the movement of the first electronic curtain across the frame. When implementing the 0-second AS, Oly has in all likelihood not bothered to work this out. This doesn't matter much as long as the shutter speed is at flash sync or below since the error will be of marginal size. When, however, you go above flash sync, and the shutter forms a slit without ever being completely upon across the entire frame, it becomes of increasing importance.

Two MFT cameras that in all likelihood do take the lens parameters into account when using the EFCS is the GM1 and GM5, neither of which has a mechanical first curtain and therefore always uses EFCS when the mechanical shutter is employed. Since the second curtain of these cameras moves slowly (flash sync is only 1/50 s), the timing of the first versus second curtain becomes a practical problem much earlier than with the Oly bodies that use an EFCS. Consequently, the GM1 and GM5 don't even allow use of the mechanical shutter unless the lens is electrically connected and the relevant lens parameters thus known. For MF lenses, only the purely electronic shutter is operative with these bodies.

I found it a bit surprising that SS was so clearly visible at 1/500 and 1/640 sec in this test/comparison :

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55121948

I am a bit surprised at that too. I haven't tested a whole lot with the E-M1 and the 75-300 I use these days (my 100-300 is on my list of things to sell) above the 1/320 border-line where 0-second AS stops working. But I haven't spontaneously encountered any signs of problems and my rule of thumb with the 100-300 on my E-M5 was that shutter speeds like 1/500 and 1/640 would be safe from an SS point of view.

I have, with my GX7 and now sold Oly 40-150. Shutter shock up to 1/600 (and even higher) when beyond 90mm. Strangely my new Pana 45-150 doesn't suffer at all at high speeds. I have not tested in the 1/160 range yet but that is also out of hand holding range (maybe doable with ois).

Yes. I think we talked about that already in another thread. Based on the reports I see (and to some extent my own experiences as well), the Oly 40-150 appears to be particularly vulnerable from an SS point of view. It could be that this lens is prone to internal displacements of one kind or another when subjected to the shock.

I think shaky lens barrel. Beyond a certain point the barrel became more loose here.

Maybe it is like the 1/f rule (1/2f for us). Some argue it should be more like 1/5f on FF for perfect results. Maybe beyond 1/320 you get acceptable result SS wise, but still better at higher speeds or with electronic shutter (No EFC to try unfortunatly).

At this point I have not found any of my lenses to be impacted by shutter shock anymore, but when I do find one (I hope I don't) I will test it in the higher SS too.

 

[secretworld]

"I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to."

i cant get used to this forum software i use the flat view or whatever its called and just post on the end of what i see.. it quite clearly dosnt fit in with threaded view.. he he

the rest of the forum world seems to have moved on dpreview dosnt.. i dont like the threaded view but dont want to appear to be replying to any particular individual when i am not.. i dont see much of a way around it though unless i am missing something.. if i am i would be happy to be clued in..

Even if you view the thread in flat rather than threaded view, just make sure to push reply on the post you want to reply to rather than on the last post in the thread.

Yes, but there is no way to add something to the discussion without it being a reply to someone. Which I do a lot. I just wouldn't worry to much when it is obviously not a reply to you. Having two ways of reading can be confusing cause we don't see the same. And this wasn't really a reply to Anders but to the person who said: "I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to." And I am to lazy to find who that was, but this answer is for you ;-) .

 

[XMN]

"I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to."

i cant get used to this forum software i use the flat view or whatever its called and just post on the end of what i see.. it quite clearly dosnt fit in with threaded view.. he he

the rest of the forum world seems to have moved on dpreview dosnt.. i dont like the threaded view but dont want to appear to be replying to any particular individual when i am not.. i dont see much of a way around it though unless i am missing something.. if i am i would be happy to be clued in..

Even if you view the thread in flat rather than threaded view, just make sure to push reply on the post you want to reply to rather than on the last post in the thread.

Yes, but there is no way to add something to the discussion without it being a reply to someone. Which I do a lot. I just wouldn't worry to much when it is obviously not a reply to you. Having two ways of reading can be confusing cause we don't see the same. And this wasn't really a reply to Anders but to the person who said: "I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to." And I am to lazy to find who that was, but this answer is for you ;-) .

 

[secretworld]

"I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to."

i cant get used to this forum software i use the flat view or whatever its called and just post on the end of what i see.. it quite clearly dosnt fit in with threaded view.. he he

the rest of the forum world seems to have moved on dpreview dosnt.. i dont like the threaded view but dont want to appear to be replying to any particular individual when i am not.. i dont see much of a way around it though unless i am missing something.. if i am i would be happy to be clued in..

Even if you view the thread in flat rather than threaded view, just make sure to push reply on the post you want to reply to rather than on the last post in the thread.

Yes, but there is no way to add something to the discussion without it being a reply to someone. Which I do a lot. I just wouldn't worry to much when it is obviously not a reply to you. Having two ways of reading can be confusing cause we don't see the same. And this wasn't really a reply to Anders but to the person who said: "I suspect it was not me who you wanted to reply to." And I am to lazy to find who that was, but this answer is for you ;-) .