An almost perfect camera, but why no EFC?

I was surprised there's no EFC, I hadn't noticed until you mentioned that. Is there any evidence that the mechanical shutter has any problems that EFC would actually help?

It is a very nice camera, it's just too big and heavy for my liking.

I don't have a GX9, but I assume that it most likely has the same shutter unit as the GX80/85, which also lacks EFCS. On the plus side however, it is a quiet, fairly low-shock shutter which I believe is due to having a partly electromagnetic drive - I recall that the main reason for the design in the GX80/85 was to reduce the chance of shutter shock. I haven't noticed any particular susceptibility to shutter shock with the GX80, though there is always a certain amount of variation between individual examples of cameras in my experience and of course it also depends on other variables such as the lens fitted and probably even the frequency of one's own shake (and the shutter speed of course).

An aside that this brought to mind: I recently discovered (the hard way) that Canon's M6 Mark II doesn't have EFCS either. This is particularly surprising, given that all their previous EOS M-series cameras have had the feature - often they are EFCS-only actuallyl (they've also used it a lot in their DSLRs and the full frame EOS R series - the R has all three choices, the RP is EFCS-only with silent shutter in a limited-options program-only scene mode, rather like the E-M10 III and E-PL9). Whilst the M6 Mark II does finally have a proper electronic shutter mode for P/Tv/Av/M modes (first time in their APS-C mirrorless lines - indeed apart from it, only the EOS M50 has a silent shutter mode, but the limited program exposure scene mode type again), it has the usual provisos and is a fairly slow scan speed one without compatibility with electronic flash. However, the mechanical shutter is GX8-like - sharp and loud - and I saw shutter shock effects immediately with it, before having read anywhere that it lacked EFCS. I checked silent shutter results against the mechanical shutter and thought "strange - it looks like shutter shock but Canon are always EFCS-only if there's no option shown for the mechanical shutter" - but a visual check of a 1 second exposure proved otherwise - full mechanical only. DPR later mentioned the lack of EFCS and the presence of shutter shock in some of their test shots, but said it was minimal. For me, it was obvious. A strange about-face on a long-standing record of providing EFCS and particularly odd given the hike to 32MP.

It seems that all brands make mystifying (and arguably unhelpful) decisions.

beethoven2493 said:

why is it so damn difficult to get connected?

Click to expand...

Probably the host is rejecting it because of no internet connection.

Try forgetting your normal existing other connection that gives internet while attempting to connect.

So far I know, EFC is a technology invented and patended by Sony.
I might be in error here, but I have a sony camera to test this:
On a 1 second exposure there is no sound and no shock until the second curtain is actuated.
This technology requires a fast stepper motor and not a spring loaded shutter.
This does not mean, I am a Sony guy, I use Olympus. ;-)

Peter Heckert2 said:

So far I know, EFC is a technology invented and patended by Sony.
I might be in error here, but I have a sony camera to test this:
On a 1 second exposure there is no sound and no shock until the second curtain is actuated.
This technology requires a fast stepper motor and not a spring loaded shutter.
This does not mean, I am a Sony guy, I use Olympus. ;-)

Click to expand...

Yes, that's how electronic first (or front, as some companies call it) curtain shutter works. I don't think it requires a fast stepper motor as plenty of cameras (not just Sonys) provide it and many of them don't use stepper motors in their shutters to my knowledge. Canon was already using it in their DSLRs for live view modes before Sony introduced it, so I doubt that it is patented by Sony (though please feel free to correct me if you have proof). Olympus happened to be using shutters that absolutely had to run the first mechanical curtain to complete a full exposure cycle when they introduced their 0-sec Anti-Shock feature, so they introduced it as a kind of "virtual" EFCS, by inserting an extremely short delay in a different point in the cycle of the first curtain to the normal timed options for Anti-Shock that previously existed (and which were not to provide EFCS but allow time for handling vibrations to die down primarily), but it was effective. From the E-M5 Mark II onwards, different shutter models which are capable of true EFCS were introduced to the Olympus range (with the exception of the E-M10 Mark II and III, and the E-PL models, which still have shutters requiring the virtual type of EFCS).

Helen said:

I don't have a GX9, but I assume that it most likely has the same shutter unit as the GX80/85, which also lacks EFCS. On the plus side however, it is a quiet, fairly low-shock shutter which I believe is due to having a partly electromagnetic drive - I recall that the main reason for the design in the GX80/85 was to reduce the chance of shutter shock. I haven't noticed any particular susceptibility to shutter shock with the GX80, though there is always a certain amount of variation between individual examples of cameras in my experience and of course it also depends on other variables such as the lens fitted and probably even the frequency of one's own shake (and the shutter speed of course).

Click to expand...

Nah, G85 is supposed to have the same shutter too, and it has EFCS. Surprised to hear the GX85/GX9 don’t have it.

dwkyre said:

Helen said:

I don't have a GX9, but I assume that it most likely has the same shutter unit as the GX80/85, which also lacks EFCS. On the plus side however, it is a quiet, fairly low-shock shutter which I believe is due to having a partly electromagnetic drive - I recall that the main reason for the design in the GX80/85 was to reduce the chance of shutter shock. I haven't noticed any particular susceptibility to shutter shock with the GX80, though there is always a certain amount of variation between individual examples of cameras in my experience and of course it also depends on other variables such as the lens fitted and probably even the frequency of one's own shake (and the shutter speed of course).

Click to expand...

Nah, G85 is supposed to have the same shutter too, and it has EFCS. Surprised to hear the GX85/GX9 don’t have it.

Click to expand...

Well, that’s just it - the G80/85 has a slightly different shutter which does offer EFCS, but for whatever reason the rangefinder-shape models don’t. Actually,bathe two shutters do sound different (with the G80 in full mechanical mode to match the GX80) - the smaller camera’s shutter sound has a slightly slow sound to it.

Barry Twycross said:

I was surprised there's no EFC, I hadn't noticed until you mentioned that. Is there any evidence that the mechanical shutter has any problems that EFC would actually help?

It is a very nice camera, it's just too big and heavy for my liking.

Click to expand...

Putting 14~140 on GX85, its new shutter (the same used by GX9 and G85), does not eliminate shutter shock 100%.

E-shutter is the best solution to GX85 but it does not support flash, slowest 1" shutter and suffered from rolling shutter effect.

EFCS is the best solution that on G85, it can generally eliminate shutter shock, if not 100%, most of the time. Without much limitation as e-shutter except a limit of 1/2000".

Not sure why only GXs do not have it as even GFs basically have (use) EFCS (up to 1/500"?) without a pure m-shutter... But it is something which we have to live with?

alcelc said:

Putting 14~140 on GX85, its new shutter (the same used by GX9 and G85), does not eliminate shutter shock 100%.

Click to expand...

How would you test for this?

Or put it another way, what's the worst case for getting shutter shock?

Shutter shock is not blurry image by any mean. Obviously blurry images are mostly stability issue. In most case SS is Just sort of soft feeling only.

If you compare 2 images from 14-140 on GX7 taken by e-shutter and m-shutter, you can always observe the issue easier. Because of the better m-shutter of GX85, the difference is smaller but SS never completely gone.

Without comparison SS might be overlooked easily because it might be a result of shooter stability, slow shutter speed, shooting technique, quality of the lens or the f/stop in used, even the atmospheric factors etc that could cause the softness.

After AA filter be removed from GX85 onward, cameras indeed are capable to produce very crispy sharp image. If the image has been focused properly and we still observe certain degree of softness, it could possibly be SS.

A recent test when G85 was purchased on m-shutter, EFCS and e-shutter (all were taken handheld, leaning on wall for the best stability):



The above were taken from 45-200 mk-I on G85. Although SS of it is not as well known as 14-140, it is one of the earliest Panny lens (back to the day of GX1) be i.d. to show SS. IMHO despite the image which was few hundred meters away from m-shutter is not bad, it is softer than those from e-shutter and EFCS.

If the result from m-shutter will be of your satisfaction, you might ignore SS. Just would you care about it.

My 2 cents.

--
Albert

Helen said:

stepper motors in their shutters to my knowledge. Canon was already using it in their DSLRs for live view modes before Sony introduced it, so I doubt that it is patented by Sony (though please feel free to correct me if you have proof).

Click to expand...

Sorry I have no proof. Canon sensors are made by Sony, so it is reasonable to assume it. Anyway it doesnt matter who owns the patent, because everything is patented, somebody owns the patent. ;-)

If EFC is used beyond the flash synchron time, then this requires accurate electronic synchronization between the first electronic shutter and the second mechanic shutter. This reqires a stepper motor.

Thats my explanation, based on my educated guesses. I have no proof. ;-) Probably nobody has a proof, and those people knowing it are probably under NDA. ;-)

Peter Heckert2 said:

Helen said:

stepper motors in their shutters to my knowledge. Canon was already using it in their DSLRs for live view modes before Sony introduced it, so I doubt that it is patented by Sony (though please feel free to correct me if you have proof).

Click to expand...

Sorry I have no proof. Canon sensors are made by Sony, so it is reasonable to assume it. Anyway it doesnt matter who owns the patent, because everything is patented, somebody owns the patent. ;-)

Click to expand...

Again, I respectfully disagree. Canon APS-C and full frame sensors (and the other sizes used in a very few of their DSLRs over the years) have always been made by Canon - they only use Sony sensors in their compact digital cameras. That's actually very well known.

Peter Heckert2 said:

If EFC is used beyond the flash synchron time, then this requires accurate electronic synchronization between the first electronic shutter and the second mechanic shutter. This reqires a stepper motor.

Click to expand...

But actually, many manufacturers do have caps on the fastest speed at which EFCS can be run.

Peter Heckert2 said:

Thats my explanation, based on my educated guesses. I have no proof. ;-) Probably nobody has a proof, and those people knowing it are probably under NDA. ;-)

Click to expand...

I just tried a test with my GX9, and I got shutter shock. It's bad between 1/40 and 1/80, but looks like it's present between 1/10 and 1/200 to some degree.

I did that with a Panasonic 45-150 at the 150 end. I took two series of photos using shutter priority and auto-ISO every click of the shutter speed between 1/10 and 1/400. One series with MSHTR and one with ESHTR.

Then I compared the ESHTR images with the MSHTR images. The ESHTR images tended to be sharp, and the MSHTR ones somewhat blurred. Sometimes it's obvious looking just at the MSHTR ones (like between 1/40 and 1/80), but the comparison definitely shows MSHTR blurring at most other speed.

Though above 1/200, the blurring tended to be with the ESHTR compared to the MSHTR.

This is rather disappointing.

I make reproducibly this observation as shown in the image.
Image is taken with OM-D E-M1.1 in 0s antishock mode.
The lens used is Panasonic 100-300mm version 1.
Left image is made with Lens OIS off and IBIS on.
Right image is with Lens OIS on and IBIS off.

It is visible that the left image is sharper. It is visible that Olympus EFC is not a true EFC and shutter shock blurs the image due to lens vibration, so effectively the image is blurred from 16 Mpix downto about 4 MPix resolution.

Sorry, very bad weather here so the shot is made indoors and to get accurate autofocus, I shot the glass body of a lamp indoors.

You're demonstrably wrong, since I know other *Panasonic* cameras have EFC.

(that's in response to Peter, not Helen)

Peter Heckert2 said:

I make reproducibly this observation as shown in the image.
Image is taken with OM-D E-M1.1 in 0s antishock mode.
The lens used is Panasonic 100-300mm version 1.
Left image is made with Lens OIS off and IBIS on.
Right image is with Lens OIS on and IBIS off.
It is visible that the left image is sharper. It is visible that Olympus EFC is not a true EFC and shutter shock blurs the image due to lens vibration, so effectively the image is blurred from 16 Mpix downto about 4 MPix resolution.
Sorry, very bad weather here so the shot is made indoors and to get accurate autofocus, I shot the glass body of a lamp indoors.

Click to expand...

You're correct that the E-M1 original model does the "virtual" EFCS that I already described (you know, the type where a shutter model is used that requires the first mechanical curtain to run to complete the release cycle, so 0-sec Anti-Shock therefore instead inserts a very short delay (a very small fraction of a second) in a different point of the operation of the first curtain than the original (and still available) timed Anti-Shock settings that have a shortest setting of 1/8 second). I apologise that I didn't specifically reference that this model does this, because I limited my comments to models currently available new.

I'm not entirely sure that your illustration proves that 0-sec Anti-Shock of this "virtual" type doesn't solve shutter shock - it's quite possible that it doesn't of course, and I've always suspected that any type of EFCS won't necessarily solve the ensuing shots in fast sequence shooting. However, with your lens at 300mm (which is a 600mm equivalent in 35mm terms) and a shutter speed of 1/50, with the only difference between the two shots being whether in-lens or in-body stabilization is used, it could equally be an illustration of how efficient each method of stabilization is for 3.5 stops below the typical safe limit for hand-holdability, couldn't it?

beethoven2493 said:

You're demonstrably wrong, since I know other *Panasonic* cameras have EFC.

Click to expand...

Thanks for not aiming that at me by the way (yes, I've seen the follow-up you posted - phew!). Yes - the EFCS feature came in with the G80/81/85 and is found on the GH5 series, the G9, the G90/91/95. It's slightly perplexing that both the GX9 and the GX80/85 don't have EFCS, since all the models named above apparently use a shutter with electromagnetic drive (to cut down vibration) - though to (again) politely disagree with Peter, this is not the same as using stepper motors. To my knowledge, only the shutter introduced in the GM1 and also used in the GM5 plus the ensuing members of the GF family (known as GXxxx models in some markets - I'm referring to the tiniest, no-EVF models in the Panasonic line) has stepper motors, and it is quite different. Some of the design of that shutter might be dictated by the need for small size, but it has NO front/first curtain mechanism at all - when the mechanical shutter runs, it therefore always in EFCS mode - and it has a very slow flash sync speed for a mechanical EFCS shutter - 1/50 sec - and a top speed of only 1/500 sec. As I understand it, these are side-effects of using stepper motors, rather than its small size overall.

I haven't seen any other manufacturers mention stepper motors in focal plane shutters yet, and whilst it's possible some may have electromagnetic drives like the two Panasonic lines initially mentioned, none seem to have been publicised to the extent that Panasonic did.