Sony A77ii Steadyshot/W shutter issue (Soft Images)

It sure does make a difference. Especially when we are talking commercial work. I make money with my camera's. I spend top dollar on lenses and expect the best results possible. If i'm out shooting the kids...then no such a big deal. However when one is after top performance, and the camera is capable of that level of performance. Then yes I expect it to perform to that level. The reason I feel this way is that this camera was an upgrade from the A77 and in my type of work (Natue and long lens work) it was producing worse results than the older version. Yes I have it figured out and can turn that option off. But I don't think asking for a solution to support tech that was implemented on the new camera is too much to ask. Sony is notorious for not supporting previous models with firmware updates. I hope that when there is a known issue found though that this would change.

IanML said:

No, it would not make a difference, because those shutter speeds were so fast. Steady shot only offers benefit when the shutter is slower than 1/focal length in mm. At faster speeds, it shouldn't matter whether it's on or off.

Click to expand...

I think that many people will not be able to consistently get razor sharp images at shutter speeds of 1/focal length on a 24 mp APS-C camera. I don't see why SS may not be useful above that limit. There have been many suggestions that it does not work well at high shutter speeds, but those are generally used with long focal length. At long focal lengths factors such as limitations on extent of sensor travel may start to have an effect. At high shutter speeds acceleration may be a factor. I have not seen any of this spelled out anywhere with any authority.

IanML said:

Oswald74's tests were also at too fast a speed, but the results suggest that a defocusing effect is happening. Could you repeat with manual focus to see whether the effect is linked to AF?

Click to expand...

Yes must be MF. PDAF systems produce variation in focus.

Fivepin said:

It sure does make a difference. Especially when we are talking commercial work.

Click to expand...

No offense but I doubt that the people you are doing commercial work for would pixel peep to that extent to see the difference. Commercial photographers were making good money with lesser equipment 5-10 years ago. The toughest critic is you, not your customers. That is a good thing because at least they know they are getting the best you can offer. It also logical that you want the best your camera can offer so turning off IS in the viewfinder is your best option. It is possible that is the best the tech can offer for now.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.

craig66 said:

IanML said:

No, it would not make a difference, because those shutter speeds were so fast. Steady shot only offers benefit when the shutter is slower than 1/focal length in mm. At faster speeds, it shouldn't matter whether it's on or off.

Click to expand...

I think that many people will not be able to consistently get razor sharp images at shutter speeds of 1/focal length on a 24 mp APS-C camera. I don't see why SS may not be useful above that limit....

Click to expand...

I don't dispute that people could use stabilization at shutter speeds faster than 1/focal length if it were available, but it is my understanding that Sony's Steady Shot does not provide it. The sensor and mechanism loop is not capable of performing at the higher frequencies which would be required.

IanML said:

craig66 said:

IanML said:

No, it would not make a difference, because those shutter speeds were so fast. Steady shot only offers benefit when the shutter is slower than 1/focal length in mm. At faster speeds, it shouldn't matter whether it's on or off.

Click to expand...

I think that many people will not be able to consistently get razor sharp images at shutter speeds of 1/focal length on a 24 mp APS-C camera. I don't see why SS may not be useful above that limit....

Click to expand...

I don't dispute that people could use stabilization at shutter speeds faster than 1/focal length if it were available, but it is my understanding that Sony's Steady Shot does not provide it. The sensor and mechanism loop is not capable of performing at the higher frequencies which would be required.

Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this?

craig66 said:

IanML said:

craig66 said:

IanML said:

No, it would not make a difference, because those shutter speeds were so fast. Steady shot only offers benefit when the shutter is slower than 1/focal length in mm. At faster speeds, it shouldn't matter whether it's on or off.

Click to expand...

I think that many people will not be able to consistently get razor sharp images at shutter speeds of 1/focal length on a 24 mp APS-C camera. I don't see why SS may not be useful above that limit....

Click to expand...

I don't dispute that people could use stabilization at shutter speeds faster than 1/focal length if it were available, but it is my understanding that Sony's Steady Shot does not provide it. The sensor and mechanism loop is not capable of performing at the higher frequencies which would be required.

Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this?

Click to expand...

I'd like to know that too. And why should higher frequencies be required anyway? I would expect the shake frequencies to be the same at any shutter speed (though focal length and lens mass could have an effect on them). Mainly the duration of the shake should change at faster shutter speeds.

Another thing: If the system can operate at, for example, 1/400s with a 400mm lens, (don't we think it does?), what would prevent it from also operating at 1/400s with a 24mm lens?

The question on Dyxum was raised wheither E front curtain on and off would make any difference so....

Ok. I did another 3 rounds of testing this morning this time testing my original results against the new variable E front curtain off and on. I started the testing with the 70 - 400 G as that was the lens on the camera and I thought ...what the hell give it a go. Well I got really mixed results with that lens. So much so that I had to go back and do my original test of just Ss Shutter on and off with the A77ii. (If you recall my original tests were done with the Sony 28 - 75 and 300 Tokina). After 2 rounds of testing and around 30 shots of comparison. I can say that SS with Shutter off was still the best option. But not as consistently. This time there were 3 clear instances where SS with shutter on were sharper. Then there were another 8 or so instances where I would say It was a draw...I could not tell the difference. And then the rest where SS with shutter off were better. After analyzing these photos my opinion is that the 70 - 400 at 380 mm or so was just not as sharp as the tokina and I could not see as much detail loss because the detail was not there to begin with. Also to note that in 8 out of 9 tests SS with shutter off and E curtain on the results were better than with E curtain off. The last test was the only one where E curtain off produced a sharper image...weird. I will again state my opinion that the E curtain produces less movement in the camera and this is probably why I got this result. With E curtain off it feels exactly like the camera is taking two frames. (I have had it off for a year so I really realized the difference in feel). As for the E curtain on off tests with the tokina. All test came back showing the sharpest results with SS/shutter off and E curtain on. Make what you will of it people. The results I guess will vary depending on the sharpness of your lens. At this point from reading all of the facebook, dpreview and dyxum forum comments. I see a trend. SS with shutter of is degrading quality. However some people say not so much and some people say they notice no difference. If I were not layering these images in photoshop and switching back and forth...no I would not (especially with the 70 - 400 G) be able to see this difference either. With some lenses such as the tokina and my 28 - 75 which are much sharper. I do see the difference and it is worth shutting of the SS shutter.

[No message]

I've made a series of tests with SS/with shutter on and off with both the Sony 16/50 @50/f5.6 and Tamron 70-300 @300/f8 with shutter speeds from 1/100 to 1/400, handheld, AFS, center focus point. ISO 100 to 400.

Compared shots in Lightroom at 100% (there's a double window inside Library module to compare X to Y shots).

Found nothing: each image is very sharp and there's no difference between series with SS/with shutter off or on.

If I look for a trend, few shots with SS/with shutter on were sharper then analogous shots with SS/with shutter on.

Fivepin said:

Ok guys if you own an A77ii...you need to watch this video I made. As mentioned in an earlier post about the dyxum forum topic I started, I wanted to show you the results of the testing for Image stabilization on with SS shutter option on as well. Watch the video and I will show you where to find these options and the results...YOU MAY BE IN FOR A SURPRISE about the quality you are getting if you have both of these turned on....As well....who says this is just an A77ii issue...anybody want to do some testing with E mount....maybe we are onto something big...that needs addressing.....Firmware fix maybe....anyway...check it out here.

Comparison of shots with the Sony A77ii and image stabilization on and then again on with Shutter stabilization turned on. The results were surprising. With Shutter stabilization on we are losing a great amount of detail. This camera always seemed sub par in sharpness to my original A77. I had both of these settings on from the day I bought it and now I know why. For best image results. turn the stabilization with shutter option off!!

Click to expand...

What AF mode are you using, AF-S, AF-A, or AF-C?

And although this is in single shot mode, what do you see in 8 fps or 12 fps? Do you see a few sharp images interspersed with less sharp ones? Are more of them sharp in one test vs another?

Yes as mentioned the differences are so subtle with some lens combinations that the only way to see any differences are 100 % over lay of prints and flip back and forth...if there are any differences your eye will see the movement on the screen and you can focus in on areas with loss of detail. Side by side will not show very subtle changes. They may still be there...but are too insignificant for your eye to pick up a lost edge here or there.

Fivepin said:

Yes as mentioned the differences are so subtle with some lens combinations that the only way to see any differences are 100 % over lay of prints and flip back and forth...if there are any differences your eye will see the movement on the screen and you can focus in on areas with loss of detail. Side by side will not show very subtle changes. They may still be there...but are too insignificant for your eye to pick up a lost edge here or there.

Click to expand...

As I alluded to previously I think there is too much pixel peeping with the resulting emotional stress going on. It reminds me of the A55 "ghosting" scandal that was rare and needed 100% pixel peeping to even detect at all. Despite that Sony did redesign the mirror to eliminate it completely on subsequent models.

Quote from DPR at the time which relates to this situation as well;

"Since publishing this review we have taken the opportunity to investigate the much-discussed 'ghosting' effect of the A55's semi-transparent mirror. Our conclusion - if you know where to look for ghosting, you might find it on close examination, but we don't consider it to be a problem in the vast majority of 'real world' shooting situations."

Unlike that situation you always have the option to turn off IS in viewfinder if you think there's a problem that bothers you so in the end it's a non issue that needs no further discussion.

As gearheads we have a tendency to get bent out of shape over photographically insignificant details. Canon cameras dominate the market despite having sensors with inferior dynamic range and color depth because they still excel as photographic tools. Since this issue seems inconsistent unless someone decides to take hundreds of photos at different shutter speeds, lenses and focal lengths I have to say that the issue is unproven and likely imaginary. The big flaw here is to get the best out of the best lenses at longer focal lengths the camera should be mounted on a tripod with SSS off which makes the whole thing a moot point.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.

you that's great, so let those that it does happen to, discuss it. Let them discuss their cameras and their techniques.

Please!

stardotstar said:

you that's great, so let those that it does happen to, discuss it. Let them discuss their cameras and their techniques.

Click to expand...

I think it's a completely legitimate area of discussion as to the possibility that this problem doesn't even exist but is merely the product of over analysis and poor testing techniques. At first I admitted there could be a problem but it's beginning to appear that there may not be. Go ahead and stress yourself out over this. Me I'm done and will move on to things that are real issues.

[No message]

Poor testing techniques. Right. I have clearly shown how the tests were done and presented them in a manner which clearly shows the differences. At great time cost to myself. I have spent numerous hours on this problem and do not appreciate the claim that there is some lack of transparency in what I am showing here. Facts are I have presented evidence that clearly supports my claim. I also have numerous others showing the same result. So as to you not enjoying this discussion or findings. Great. Move on. Please stop telling us what should and should not be considered a problem. That is your opinion only.

Fivepin said:

Poor testing techniques. Right. I have clearly shown how the tests were done and presented them in a manner which clearly shows the differences. At great time cost to myself. I have spent numerous hours on this problem and do not appreciate the claim that there is some lack of transparency in what I am showing here. Facts are I have presented evidence that clearly supports my claim. I also have numerous others showing the same result. So as to you not enjoying this discussion or findings. Great. Move on. Please stop telling us what should and should not be considered a problem. That is your opinion only.

Click to expand...

I certainly appreciate the work you did.

Thank you so much for this demonstration! Going to see if this makes a difference in my images, as sometimes they do appear to be "soft."

Fivepin said:

Ok guys if you own an A77ii...you need to watch this video I made. As mentioned in an earlier post about the dyxum forum topic I started, I wanted to show you the results of the testing for Image stabilization on with SS shutter option on as well. Watch the video and I will show you where to find these options and the results...YOU MAY BE IN FOR A SURPRISE about the quality you are getting if you have both of these turned on....As well....who says this is just an A77ii issue...anybody want to do some testing with E mount....maybe we are onto something big...that needs addressing.....Firmware fix maybe....anyway...check it out here.

Comparison of shots with the Sony A77ii and image stabilization on and then again on with Shutter stabilization turned on. The results were surprising. With Shutter stabilization on we are losing a great amount of detail. This camera always seemed sub par in sharpness to my original A77. I had both of these settings on from the day I bought it and now I know why. For best image results. turn the stabilization with shutter option off!!

Click to expand...

Have you tried shooting bursts? The Olympus E-M1 has a similar setting to get a stabilized viewfinder. In my experience, it gets less sharp shots than without the stable EVF, but in this case, it'll just drop the ball completely. I'd say around 30% of the shots taken in a burst with the EVF stabilizer are useless, but the rest look no worse than those taken with normal IBIS. It might be similar between the two cameras.

No never tried bursts. It can't handle a single shot being held as steady as I can hold it. I turned the EVF Steady shot W shutter off and have not looked back. My camera is shooting much sharper now and is back to the quality I obtained with the original A77.