E-P5 and "shtter Shock"

Started Oct 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
Simon Cowell Senior Member • Posts: 2,534
Re: E-P5 and "shtter Shock"

Anders W wrote:

Simon Cowell wrote:

Hmm, a counter argument might be that "the inability of IBIS to simply hold the sensor in place with sufficient rigor" could still produce some shake but which is within the safe bounds of OIS (and that's why you get less blur).

How would you define the "safe bounds of OIS"?

Simply as the frequency range of movement that the Panasonic OIS can effectively apply corrections for. You cannot exclude the possibility that this may happen.

After all, the double image effect that we see in the images posted here do not show a very high level of blur, it's the kind of blur that one might associate with subtle camera movement.

I think that apart from mechanical vibrations,

We have evidence (via the experiment described below but also via the investigation reported here


section 4.2) that the blur due to shutter-shock is not a matter vibration but of brute extraneous movement. Shock, pure and simple.

Maybe my definition of vibration is different and perhaps more general than yours as I would consider vibration almost anything relating to movement.

In any case, I did not go through that page last as I thought it was about a different camera (Pentax) with perhaps a completely different IBIS. However, it seems to be quite relevant and I hope I'm not breaching any copyright by repeating part of section 4.2 here:

"Finding #6: The extraneous blur is not caused by a bell vibration effect. It is caused as a result of extraneous body movement during the exposure.

Note: this finding does not rule out a vibrating imaging board (which the SR module is mounted onto) where vibration is stimulated by body movement rather than frame vibration. Therefore, whenever we consider vibration of the image sensor in the following, it could be caused by mechanical vibration of the imaging board too."

I think his note may be relevant to E-P5 as you cannot exclude the possibility of sensor vibrations due to shutter movement. And in his summary in section 6 he emphasizes a similar point:

"In the case of the Pentax K-7 camera, the shutter accelarations are a bit high and its floating sensor must then slip by a small amount (which isn't a bad thing as it counteracts the body movement due to shutter operation). But as a result of this, the camera electronics may struggle to get the floating sensor back into tight control. Or the imaging board may swing a little bit. Either effect magnifies blur to a level that it may become visible to the naked eye."

Actually I find his work nothing short of amazing but in my view (a) it does not explain clearly whether the phenomenon is 100% reproducible, and (b) it leaves the explanation open to two interpretations i.e. either inability of IBIS to get the sensor back in control or the sensor swinging. That's why I think that testing may need specialized equipment.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow