-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sutter Shock? Pictures from the holy land.
- Thread starter photohounds
- Start date
- Status
Who cares. Testing at cute little focal lengths and then concluding that shutter shock is a non-issue is laughable. Literally. I don't see it in those circumstances either.
Put a long lens on your camera (150mm+) and then do some methodical testing. Tripod, hand-held, whatever. Otherwise you are, having not seen the clearest examples of the phenomenon, quite simply ill-equipped to engage in any useful discussion about it.
Anders W
Forum Pro
Right.Of course there is no perfectly SS free camera, in absolute termsDoes sample variation exist?To me, there are 2 main groups in this SS debate, and they are not just the simple 'SS believers' and 'SS deniers'.In fact the E-PL5, which I had briefly, had indeed a vibration problem which affected it between 1/100 and 1/200, but it was v. visible, and it was documented almost immediately. I don't notice it with the PM1 which should have the same shutter generation, so perhaps O. cured it.
The E-M5 never had it, in fact it has the gentlest shutter by comparison. Vibrations are always possible, and have been for half a century since the actuations became much harder than the sweet Compurs.
Of course it's the generalizing that is stupid, not mentioning the exceptions. If vibrations ruined the shot at all times, a camera maker might as well kill himself
Instead it v. easy to ruin a shot with a light mirrorless camera, despite the IBIS, for not holding it well, or having the shakes, but what deepens the stupidity, is that I have never seen anybody accepting user error. That's human nature, but stupidity nevertheless. So to me the whole debate is flawed.
Am.
See my new blog in the sign: it's fun!
--
'Photo & Poetry'
http://amalric2014.blogspot.it/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
1º group: 'I have SS, i am not doing anything wrong, you surely have it too, you just don't know how to search for it'
2º group: 'I don't have it, i know how to search for it, you surelly don't have too, you just don't know how to old a camera'
This is almost polarized in this two almost fanatic groups when for me, there are at least 4 groups:
1 - People that really have SS
2 - Peolple that really don't have SS
3 - People that think they have SS but just don't know how to old a camera
4 - People that think they don't have SS but just don't know how to search for it (or don't care for it)
I conced that at least this 4 groups exist. Extremists positions such as: "if i see it/don't see it, you must/must not also" don't cut it for me.
Sample variation in cameras DOES exist. Is that so hard to believe?
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53439799
Most likely, yes.
Does this help explain why people come to different conclusions?
Most likely, yes.
Is there such a thing as an MFT camera perfectly free from shutter shock when used in conjunction with the purely mechanical shutter present on all such cameras hitherto produced except the GM1?
Most likely, no. If you answer yes to this question, you are claiming that Newton's third law of motion is invalid. I am not willing to make that claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion
The rotation of the earth doesn't preclude the existance of an SS-free camera. When a purely electronic shutter is used, the camera is SS-free.
It is certainly possible to find equipment combinations such that SS is likely to be practically insignificant even to discerning users. But this is not just a matter of sample variation. At 300 mm, the effect is likely to be significant no matter what.
Exactly.
Not sure I follow you here. With my E-M5, I don't expect to see much blur due to shutter shock at 1/320 whereas I do expect to see at least a little bit at 1/200 if the FL is sufficiently long, and even more if I go down to 1/100 or 1/125.
This is perfectly in line with my hopes as well as expectations.I just retested mine and even at 12mm!! and 25mm with 1/200 gives me SS, not anymore with AS-0s
I find that with 40mm long (as i said) i should have almost undistinguishable images from 1/200 to 1/320. Of course if i have a 150mm i expect differences.
See the thing is that now we have things like full electronic and electronic first curtain shutter options, in many circumstances we can get away with using lighter and more portable tripods than we could before. The same lighter and more portable tripods that we've always been able to use with other cameras (even of similar weight) with greater success in the troublesome shutter speed range.
So you can have your fun carrying on about "user error" while others enjoy tangible benefits.
davidedric
Veteran Member
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
FWIW I did my own tests with my kit indoors under carefully controlled conditions, and I am satisfied I know under what conditions it occurs, and how severe it is.
So far as iI am concerned it is just another factor to be (occasionally) considered when shooting, along with the limitations of an electronic shutter, for example.
Dave
FWIW I did my own tests with my kit indoors under carefully controlled conditions, and I am satisfied I know under what conditions it occurs, and how severe it is.
So far as iI am concerned it is just another factor to be (occasionally) considered when shooting, along with the limitations of an electronic shutter, for example.
Dave
Tony Rogers
Senior Member
To me, those images don't look very sharp, although the 1/400 sec looks sharpest even though it as at Iso 3200. The lack of sharpness may be the box printing itself. Or shutter shock. Or something else.
If there is a known issue with this lens, I would suggest that you repeat the test on the E-M1 with and without 0 sec shutter lag. If you use a target with very fine lines (finer than the letters on your cereal boxes), it is easier to see any blur when present. You tend to see a double line rather than a soft edge. Also, compare it to the E-P5. Both 16mp sensors should give similar results. If 0 sec shutter lag improves your image sharpness on the E-M1, I would suggest that it demonstrates shutter shock.
I would be interested to hear your conclusions.
Jeff Tokayer
Veteran Member
Jeff Tokayer
Veteran Member
Put a long lens on your camera or you are wasting your time. And everyone elses too.
Wrong. If your intent is to actually reveal the shape of the issue and then determine to what extent and in what circumstances it might effect you, then you should begin with a worst case scenario (but a real scenario that you could conceivably find yourself in). After I became cognizant of the shutter shock issue myself I put my E-M5 + Oly 75-300 on a light tripod that had been set up on soft grass and fired off a bunch of test shots with different anti-shock settings at full tele. This is, potentially, a real shooting situation because if I'm forced to carry a heavier more stable tripod around, or wander all over the place looking for the most stable surface to set up on while I watch my subject matter fly away, I think I'd rather stay at home. And what I learned helped me to effectively work around an issue (albeit with certain caveats) instead of remaining an occasional victim of it.
Anders W
Forum Pro
There is absolutely no reason for any rational person to waste time looking at your images. If you think differently, please let us know what you think those reasons might be.
Anders W
Forum Pro
What I had difficulties following was only your inference from shots at 1/320 to shots at 1/250 or 1/200. If you have actually verified that you get perfectly sharp results at all three shutter speeds, then everything is of course just fine. However, it is certainly possible as well as likely that the amount of blur due to SS increases as you go from 1/320 to 1/200 and 40 mm is certainly not an FL where significant blur due to SS is inconceivable.
Anders W
Forum Pro
That's not an answer to the question I asked. So let me repeat it:
Can the user be blamed for holding the camera wrongly even when he/she doesn't hold the camera?
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53412887
http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artnov12/dw-SonyNEX5N.html
Let me add another question:
Those two tests show that images shot with an electronic first curtain shutter are sharper than those shot with a purely mechanical shutter. Why is that?
Your methods are inappropriate in a large number of ways. They are also insufficiently as well as incorrectly described.
What you personally find acceptable has nothing whatsoever to do with the objective existence of blur due to shutter shock.
Feel free to spend your weekend as you see fit. As long as you don't confuse your activities with anything worth calling a test, everything is fine.
Anders W
Forum Pro
The fact that the E-P5 and the E-M1 go to 1/8000 rather than 1/4000 is of no importance per se. The higher max speed might theoretically be accomplished by using a more narrow slit.
What might matter, however, is that the E-P5 and E-M1 both have a higher flash sync speed than earlier Oly bodies. This in turn implies that the shutter blades move at higher speed, thereby involving stronger forces (if the blades are equally heavy), which might increase the likelihood of significant blur due to shutter shock.
Note, however, that shutter shock is by no means a phenomenon confined to these two bodies. Prior generations of bodies are clearly affected as well.
Jeff Tokayer
Veteran Member
Do you even know which shots had which setting? Did you write it down?Here are some shots. Some have Anti-Shock set to (0). Some have Anti-Shock set to OFF. Which ones are which? Of course the only valid test would have someone set Anti-Shock to (0) or OFF, someone else take the photo, and then for you to decide which are which. But this should be good enough because honestly I don't care what the shots show (or don't):
I haven't even looked at these myself but if you can correctly identify which are which I'll be very impressed.
Shutter Shock seems to be a catch-all phrase used anytime someone gets a blurry photo. There are very few credible tests which show it and even those tests aren't reproducible. (Hand held photos by someone who is a believer is NOT credible BTW -- anyone can blur a photo). My guess is that blurring related to the equipment, when that occurs, is not related to the shutter in the simple way that has been suggested. Other things are probably involved. All in all it's mostly a distraction which is best ignored, and hopefully the new Anti-Shock (0) setting will let this happen.
Bet you won't.
- Status
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum