Mirror Lockup - What I learned today

ccsoccer03 · May 8, 2018

Hi,

My name is Cameron and I use a D7200. I have been having issues with pictures being especially blurry on my 55-300mm at the long end. I tried stopping it down, increasing shutter speed, etc. I wanted to share with you two mostly identical pictures, but with one with the mirror not locked up but using a timer, and the other, the mirror is locked up, I wait 6 seconds, then used a wireless remote shutter. You can see the largest difference by looking at the bird house pirch . I was astounded at the difference. No, its not tact sharp and I think that may just be a limitation of the lens/light. I just wanted to share a real world example of just how much a little shake makes a difference.

No mirror lockup, f16, 300mm, 10 sec timer

Mirror lockup, wait 6 seconds, press wireless shutter, f16, 300mm

FrancoD · May 8, 2018

Shooting at 300mm with a DX camera (450mm equivalent) at 1/30th and f16 is a lot to ask to get a sharp image.

Too slow shutter speed and too small aperture.

The bird box is also underexposed.

Graham Meale · May 8, 2018

Maybe there's a bit of difference (neither is tack sharp), but to do a meaningful comparison, the first one needs to be brightened. The fact that the sun is shining in the second one means the grain in the wood and the detail in the moss are highlighted more, which might affect our judgement also.

--
www.grahammeale.info

ccsoccer03 · May 8, 2018

FrancoD said:
Shooting at 300mm with a DX camera (450mm equivalent) at 1/30th and f16 is a lot to ask to get a sharp image.

Too slow shutter speed and too small aperture.

The bird box is also underexposed.

You're absolutely right and believe me i'm still learning. For me, I'm still using my training wheels and I dont venture away from Ap Priority much. I will say the point of using f16 was that I knew the lens was soft at the beginning, so I shot at f16 to get rid of that issue, and hence I just let the camera decide the shutter speed, which it chose a relatively fast shutter speed. Here are some more examples of this test but at the open end of the aperature

No mirror lockup, underexposed(let the camera decide), f5.6

Mirror lockup, underexposed(let the camera decide), f5.6

FrancoD · May 8, 2018

I would suggest that you increase your ISO from 100 to 400 so that you can use a higher shutter speed.

You can improve that shot a bit but it still will be not that good.

thebustos · May 8, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
FrancoD said:

Shooting at 300mm with a DX camera (450mm equivalent) at 1/30th and f16 is a lot to ask to get a sharp image.

Too slow shutter speed and too small aperture.

The bird box is also underexposed.

Click to expand...

You're absolutely right and believe me i'm still learning. For me, I'm still using my training wheels and I dont venture away from Ap Priority much. I will say the point of using f16 was that I knew the lens was soft at the beginning, so I shot at f16 to get rid of that issue, and hence I just let the camera decide the shutter speed, which it chose a relatively fast shutter speed. Here are some more examples of this test but at the open end of the aperature

While stopping down a lens will generally improve sharpness, you have to remember that if you stop down too much you'll get softness due to diffraction.

According to imaging resource the Nikon 55-300mm gets soft due to diffraction at f/16 and worse above 135mm, with the best sharpness being around f/8 and f/11.

I just skimmed it, but you can check it out here:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/55-300mm-f4.5-5.6g-ed-vr-dx-af-s-nikkor/review/

No lens is perfect, but it's helpful to read what you can about the lenses you own so that you understand their strengths and weaknesses, as well as to do your own testing.

Mystery member · May 8, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
No mirror lockup, f16, 300mm, 10 sec timer

Apart from the other issues, you need to review your exposure technique. At the very least, use "Spot" metering rather than "Matrix".

Here's the histogram for your first shot...

This is what a rough adjustment PP can achieve...

With associated histogram...

tedolf · May 9, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
Hi,

My name is Cameron and I use a D7200. I have been having issues with pictures being especially blurry on my 55-300mm at the long end. I tried stopping it down, increasing shutter speed, etc. I wanted to share with you two mostly identical pictures, but with one with the mirror not locked up but using a timer, and the other, the mirror is locked up, I wait 6 seconds, then used a wireless remote shutter. You can see the largest difference by looking at the bird house pirch . I was astounded at the difference. No, its not tact sharp and I think that may just be a limitation of the lens/light. I just wanted to share a real world example of just how much a little shake makes a difference.

No mirror lockup, f16, 300mm, 10 sec timer

Mirror lockup, wait 6 seconds, press wireless shutter, f16, 300mm

Good reason to consider a mirrorless camera?

No waiting-mirror is permanently locked up.

TEdoph

Gerry Winterbourne · May 10, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
My name is Cameron and I use a D7200. I have been having issues with pictures being especially blurry on my 55-300mm at the long end. I tried stopping it down, increasing shutter speed, etc. I wanted to share with you two mostly identical pictures,

They aren't identical. The framing is slightly different which means the camera was moved between the shots; the light is different (stronger shadows visible on the second) and - much the most significant - focus is different.

Here's screen shot of extracts from PhotoME showing the AF points your camera used; first shot on left. There are two things to consider here: if the camera chose different focus points then obviously there has to be a difference where it intended to focus; and if it tried to focus differently the AF system must have moved and there's never a guarantee that a lens (especially a cheap, long-throw zoom lens) will always stop at precisely the intended position.

ccsoccer03 said:
but with one with the mirror not locked up but using a timer, and the other, the mirror is locked up, I wait 6 seconds, then used a wireless remote shutter. You can see the largest difference by looking at the bird house perch.

I see no difference that can be explained by mirror shock. It usually shows at exposures longer than the 1/25s and 1/30s you used (another non-identical factor). Movement caused by shock usually shows a slight host at the edges. All I see here is out-of-focus blur.

ccsoccer03 said:
I was astounded at the difference. No, its not tact sharp and I think that may just be a limitation of the lens/light. I just wanted to share a real world example of just how much a little shake makes a difference.

Except that I don't believe you have,

If you want to compare things you must ensure that everything except the factor you are comparing is truly identical, nit just close. In this case that would entail setting exposure manually (so that shutter speed stays the same), setting focus once (ideally manually with live view aid, but if using AF then switching to manual mode after first focus to ensure that nothing changes).

You also want to use the best aperture for your lens (f/8 in this case) to get the sharpest possible picture for comparison.

Finally, there's the issue of repeatability. You need at least three separate comparisons, each set up afresh. Ideally you alternate the order (first set with MLU then without; second set without MLU then with etc).

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Note - I'm not saying that MLU is poor practice or that it doesn't have an effect in many cases. Only that your shots here don't provide any evidence for the need for it.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006

Galleries by Gerry Winterbourne

www.pbase.com

[email protected]

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

Gerry Winterbourne said:
ccsoccer03 said:

My name is Cameron and I use a D7200. I have been having issues with pictures being especially blurry on my 55-300mm at the long end. I tried stopping it down, increasing shutter speed, etc. I wanted to share with you two mostly identical pictures,

Click to expand...

They aren't identical. The framing is slightly different which means the camera was moved between the shots; the light is different (stronger shadows visible on the second) and - much the most significant - focus is different.

Here's screen shot of extracts from PhotoME showing the AF points your camera used; first shot on left. There are two things to consider here: if the camera chose different focus points then obviously there has to be a difference where it intended to focus; and if it tried to focus differently the AF system must have moved and there's never a guarantee that a lens (especially a cheap, long-throw zoom lens) will always stop at precisely the intended position.

Gerry Winterbourne said:

but with one with the mirror not locked up but using a timer, and the other, the mirror is locked up, I wait 6 seconds, then used a wireless remote shutter. You can see the largest difference by looking at the bird house perch.

Click to expand...

I see no difference that can be explained by mirror shock. It usually shows at exposures longer than the 1/25s and 1/30s you used (another non-identical factor). Movement caused by shock usually shows a slight host at the edges. All I see here is out-of-focus blur.

Gerry Winterbourne said:

I was astounded at the difference. No, its not tact sharp and I think that may just be a limitation of the lens/light. I just wanted to share a real world example of just how much a little shake makes a difference.

Click to expand...

Except that I don't believe you have,

If you want to compare things you must ensure that everything except the factor you are comparing is truly identical, nit just close. In this case that would entail setting exposure manually (so that shutter speed stays the same), setting focus once (ideally manually with live view aid, but if using AF then switching to manual mode after first focus to ensure that nothing changes).

You also want to use the best aperture for your lens (f/8 in this case) to get the sharpest possible picture for comparison.

Finally, there's the issue of repeatability. You need at least three separate comparisons, each set up afresh. Ideally you alternate the order (first set with MLU then without; second set without MLU then with etc).

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Note - I'm not saying that MLU is poor practice or that it doesn't have an effect in many cases. Only that your shots here don't provide any evidence for the need for it.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]

So I took what you said and I've put it into practice. Note: While I tried my best to not move it, I had to navigate the menu to change from mirror lockup and not back and forth (Wireless remote).

1 - with

1 - without

2 - without

2 - with

3 - with

3 - without

Gerry Winterbourne · May 10, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
So I took what you said and I've put it into practice. Note: While I tried my best to not move it, I had to navigate the menu to change from mirror lockup and not back and forth (Wireless remote).

Two points here:

1 The shutter speed you used (3s) is in the range where mirror slap can be expected to blur the image so it's not surprising there is some difference when you use MLU.

2 One of the three shots without MLU is much more blurred than the other two, which is why you need multiple comparisons to get meaningful results.

I know this isn't the best of lenses but I'm surprised at how soft the detail in the grain is.

ccsoccer03 said:
1 - with

1 - without

2 - without

2 - with

3 - with

3 - without

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006

Galleries by Gerry Winterbourne

www.pbase.com

[email protected]

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

Gerry Winterbourne said:
ccsoccer03 said:

So I took what you said and I've put it into practice. Note: While I tried my best to not move it, I had to navigate the menu to change from mirror lockup and not back and forth (Wireless remote).

Click to expand...

Two points here:

1 The shutter speed you used (3s) is in the range where mirror slap can be expected to blur the image so it's not surprising there is some difference when you use MLU.

2 One of the three shots without MLU is much more blurred than the other two, which is why you need multiple comparisons to get meaningful results.

I know this isn't the best of lenses but I'm surprised at how soft the detail in the grain is.

Gerry Winterbourne said:

1 - with

1 - without

2 - without

2 - with

3 - with

3 - without

Click to expand...

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]

Here is one more ( all I have time for ATM) at 280 mm and then the tripod is a little closer. framing wasn't exact.

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

Now that I've given so many examples, I have another question. Do you think its possible that I have an AF Fine tune issue? Granted we agree it isn't the sharpest lens. I guess my real question is how to tell the difference between a focus issue and a Physical sharpness issue?

Gerry Winterbourne · May 10, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
Now that I've given so many examples, I have another question. Do you think its possible that I have an AF Fine tune issue?

It's possible but very unlikely, at least on the evidence here. The first pair of examples used slightly different sets of AF points. One of those pictures seems to be properly focused so there's no reason to suspect AF accuracy - if anything it's a matter of AF point selection rather than accuracy.

The second set were focused manually so there's no possibility of AF error there as it wasn't used. The depth of field at the aperture and ranges you shot from is plenty to cover and slight mis-focus.

ccsoccer03 said:
Granted we agree it isn't the sharpest lens. I guess my real question is how to tell the difference between a focus issue and a Physical sharpness issue?

There are many ways to test AF accuracy. This is the one I find simplest and easiest. http://www.komar.org/faq/camera/auto-focus-test/

To se how sharpness differs with distance set your camera on tripod at a reasonable distance from a brick wall and at an angle to it (about 45 degrees but it's not critical). Make a clear mark on the wall. Focus your camera precisely on that mark: you get this best by using manual focus in enlarged live view.

Take the picture and examine it closely. You should see peak sharpness at the mark with softening either side. You can judge how sharp peak sharpness looks.

You can roughly test AF accuracy by using single-point AF on the mark but it'd hard to be certain that the dot you see in the viewfinder is precisely on the AF point used. The AF "point" is actually a cross that's bigger than the dot; and the dot is a signal in the viewfinder and might be slightly misaligned with the centre of the AF point.

Jonsi · May 10, 2018

tedolf said:
Good reason to consider a mirrorless camera?

No waiting-mirror is permanently locked up.

TEdoph

Or, a rational option.... keep the equipment he already owns.. and lock the mirror up.

Anyway.. I was wondering who would be first to chime in with that useless, yet very predictable advice.

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

Gerry Winterbourne said:
ccsoccer03 said:

Now that I've given so many examples, I have another question. Do you think its possible that I have an AF Fine tune issue?

Click to expand...

It's possible but very unlikely, at least on the evidence here. The first pair of examples used slightly different sets of AF points. One of those pictures seems to be properly focused so there's no reason to suspect AF accuracy - if anything it's a matter of AF point selection rather than accuracy.

The second set were focused manually so there's no possibility of AF error there as it wasn't used. The depth of field at the aperture and ranges you shot from is plenty to cover and slight mis-focus.

Gerry Winterbourne said:

Granted we agree it isn't the sharpest lens. I guess my real question is how to tell the difference between a focus issue and a Physical sharpness issue?

Click to expand...

There are many ways to test AF accuracy. This is the one I find simplest and easiest. http://www.komar.org/faq/camera/auto-focus-test/

To se how sharpness differs with distance set your camera on tripod at a reasonable distance from a brick wall and at an angle to it (about 45 degrees but it's not critical). Make a clear mark on the wall. Focus your camera precisely on that mark: you get this best by using manual focus in enlarged live view.

Take the picture and examine it closely. You should see peak sharpness at the mark with softening either side. You can judge how sharp peak sharpness looks.

You can roughly test AF accuracy by using single-point AF on the mark but it'd hard to be certain that the dot you see in the viewfinder is precisely on the AF point used. The AF "point" is actually a cross that's bigger than the dot; and the dot is a signal in the viewfinder and might be slightly misaligned with the centre of the AF point.

tedolf · May 10, 2018

Jonsi said:
tedolf said:

Good reason to consider a mirrorless camera?

No waiting-mirror is permanently locked up.

TEdoph

Click to expand...

Or, a rational option.... keep the equipment he already owns.. and lock the mirror up.

Anyway.. I was wondering who would be first to chime in with that useless, yet very predictable advice.

Tedolph is always first....

in everything.

TEdolph

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

Update:

+14 AF Tune

Did some AF Fine tune testing.

I havent tested the short end so I might have to back it off a bit. What do you think?

+14 AF Tune

Mystery member · May 10, 2018

ccsoccer03 said:
Update:

+14 AF Tune

Did some AF Fine tune testing.

I havent tested the short end so I might have to back it off a bit. What do you think?

+14 AF Tune

Sorry, but you are wasting your time if you are expecting random images of furniture to reveal anything about your equipment.

Just make up a resolution rig based on the ISO12233 chart. The one that I use consists of an array of charts printed A2 (to get sufficient detail).

Here's an example...

Example using a good lens. Note uniform resolution across the frame.

Using the charts:

If you look at the resolution "wedges" you'll see that they are resolved up to about 10 units. To convert that to "line pairs per picture height" (a common measure), multiply by 325 to get 3250 lpph (good result for APS-C Nikon). For a single chart at full frame, the multiplier would be 100, but a single chart wouldn't stretch a modern lens.

I also use the same arrangement for setting AF-FT (test at various settings and choose the best). There's also a useful trick in that, even without taking a shot, there's an OVF Moire pattern that tells you that the focus is good.

ccsoccer03 · May 10, 2018

WryCuda said:
ccsoccer03 said:

Update:

+14 AF Tune

Did some AF Fine tune testing.

I havent tested the short end so I might have to back it off a bit. What do you think?

+14 AF Tune

Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are wasting your time if you are expecting random images of furniture to reveal anything about your equipment.

Just make up a resolution rig based on the ISO12233 chart. The one that I use consists of an array of charts printed A2 (to get sufficient detail).

Here's an example...

Example using a good lens. Note uniform resolution across the frame.

Using the charts:

If you look at the resolution "wedges" you'll see that they are resolved up to about 10 units. To convert that to "line pairs per picture height" (a common measure), multiply by 325 to get 3250 lpph (good result for APS-C Nikon). For a single chart at full frame, the multiplier would be 100, but a single chart wouldn't stretch a modern lens.

I also use the same arrangement for setting AF-FT (test at various settings and choose the best). There's also a useful trick in that, even without taking a shot, there's an OVF Moire pattern that tells you that the focus is good.

I used Jeffery’s AF chart http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart

While I will say what I did wasn't overly scientific, I used the chart above. I did it fairly quickly. Single focus, AF-S, mirror lockup for the testing. It looked backfocused severly. Up'd to 6, still back focused but not as much. Up'd to 14, fell within what looked to me a "Acceptable" range. The photo I posted above is to demonstrate the difference. IMO the last photo is different enough than the first cabinet that I believe its made a difference. I'm seeking validation that this change seems "Sharper" than the last. I'm not inferring its razor sharp or even right. I just feel like its probably the right direction. Next, I will be testing the 5 end and see if its off. Then I may decide to compromise.

Mirror Lockup - What I learned today

Active member

Forum Pro

Graham Meale

Guest

Active member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Active member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts