Dispelling the handheld blur myth.... D800 + 105 VR

Started May 27, 2012 | Discussions
fjpyyy Forum Member • Posts: 84
Re: Please take your 5D3 and go haunt only the Canon forums....

I guess my post struck a nerve.

Not that it's any of your business, I use dual systems. I just don't have the fervent loyalty some have to a company logo.

rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,859
1/fl is not applicable w/o some care Re: Myth?

PaulBearer wrote:

In the way back days, Modern or Pop Photo did a test about the accuracy of the 1/focal length as the minimum speed and determined that wasn't fast enough - don't recall what they recommended ratio was, but I believe it was at least twice that speed. In other words, for a 105, at least 1/250th. Even that with a macro lens at very short distances, that's not fast enough.

Do you realize the 1/fl rule was devised for sharpness for a 8x12"print seen from 2ft away? Once you start enlarging and enlarging more, as pixel count goes up (a consequence of 100% view on relatively low res monitors), you need to increase SS correspondingly.

It has nothing to do with a camera or even with it's resident resolution, but how you display your image. The problem with film and with very low res sensors of a few years back was that once you enlarge past a certain point, the original small image imprinted on sensor/film didn't carry enough detail that would make the shake blur effect perceptible. Before the blur effect showed up, detail was gone (btw, if one used ASA400 and 135 format, going beyond 10x8" would already reduce enough detail to disguise most shake blur effects).

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
user_name Veteran Member • Posts: 3,134
I am finding that the D800 excels despite all the fear mongering.

Yes, it is a little more finicky, but not the impossible beast it has been made out to be.

 user_name's gear list:user_name's gear list
Leica M8 Nikon D700 Nikon D800 Leica M Typ 240 +1 more
boels069 Contributing Member • Posts: 553
Re: I am finding that the D800 excels despite all the fear mongering.
 boels069's gear list:boels069's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM DxO Optics Pro Elite +2 more
Morpho Hunter Contributing Member • Posts: 668
Well, for a start,this isn't strictly a macro shot ..... the insect (damselfly)

is at least an inch or two in length and takes up very little of the whole picture. Given this, I'm not surprised the subject looks "sharp". Is this a 100% crop? If so, then the sharpness is impressive. If it is not, then please post one.

Cheers,

Biological_Viewfinder Senior Member • Posts: 2,207
I'll listen to Nikon & DPR

Nikon & DPR suggest using a tripod, mirror-up, and a remote.

If you're working, then do it right. If you're just monkeying around in the backyard with bugs, then enjoy the camera.

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

RomanJohnston
RomanJohnston Forum Pro • Posts: 18,827
Dont argue with us...argue with Nikon (link provided)

http://www.nikonusa.com/...U_z04IreazIXl_22UII/PDF/D800_TechnicalGuide_En.pdf

Hummm....I think the designer/manufacture has some idea how to get the most from their gear.

http://www.nikonusa.com/...U_z04IreazIXl_22UII/PDF/D800_TechnicalGuide_En.pdf

But if you did argue with me, I would just say that no one needs tell you how to use your gear, I just know how I use mine. I use best shot practices to the the absolute most from my work. The more pixels, the better the camera, the more I take my work seriously, the more I take care making my shots count.

Roman
--

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein

http://www.commercialfineart.com/

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

FourT6and2 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Dispelling the handheld blur myth.... D800 + 105 VR

Use a strobe and you can jump up and down while you take a picture and you'll still get sharp results lol.

Let's be honest, here. This camera is, for the most part, geared toward landscape shooters or people who use off-camera lighting. Most landscape shooters that I know of use tripods = no blur.

And most people who use off-camera lighting sync at around 1/60 - 1/250. But that doesn't matter because your flash duration is your effective shutter speed. And because most flash durations are fairly short you get no blur.

Look at it this way, you wouldn't grab a Phase One D645 and digital back and go around shooting hand held at 1/400, would you? Nope.

Yeah, I understand you can use this camera for whatever you want. And that includes handheld shots of insects or cats or your kids running around the backyard. But just like an expensive digital medium format system, that's not exactly the D800's forte.

So, in a sense, I totally agree with you, that there's no issue with the D800 and blur. Because considering the applications this camera is for, it shouldn't ever really be a problem. It only becomes an issue when you start using the camera outside of its area of speciality.

GearyB New Member • Posts: 17
Re: Dispelling the handheld blur myth.... D800 + 105 VR

I am pretty happy with my D800 . Hand held Tamron sp 90 macro, ISO 200, f/14, 1/60 sec

the second one is 100% crop

 GearyB's gear list:GearyB's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4G ED VR +6 more
ScottRH
ScottRH Senior Member • Posts: 1,750
Re: I'll listen to Nikon & DPR

+1

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

Nikon & DPR suggest using a tripod, mirror-up, and a remote.

If you're working, then do it right. If you're just monkeying around in the backyard with bugs, then enjoy the camera.

Andre Affleck Senior Member • Posts: 2,362
It's a fallacy...

It’s a fallacy to single out the D800 as requiring special attention to avoid motion blur. All cameras suffer proportionately the same amount of acuity loss due to motion blur, so what DPR says about the D800 applies to all cameras. It is simply a misleading statement.

It is also inaccurate to say you lose the resolution advantage when there is motion blur shooting hand held. Even when there is loss due to motion blur, the same loss is incurred with a camera of a lower resolution . It is untrue that lower resolution cameras are more immune to motion blur because of larger pixels.

On to some demonstrations. (Sorry, here comes more blown up pixels again!)

I setup two cameras on rigid tripods, a 5DII (21MP) and a 5D original (12MP). Both have 50mm lenses (a 50mm f1.4, and a 50mm1.8). I wired both cameras to fire simultaneously (as close as possible) with wired remotes. Both are using the same manual settings, f5.6, 1/200, ISO200, manual focus and developed in LR with same settings. No sharpening or NR applied.

The target is an resolution diagram hung on a pivot I so can swing it at various speeds to induce various amounts of horizontal motion blur.

Here are the results. The first shot was of the target completely still to show an unblurred shot. The next series of shots are of the target successively blurred (100% crops):

As you can see, both cameras register the same amount motion blur proportionately to each camera’s resolution. Even the very smallest motion blur is still registered on both cameras equally.

Just to verify this, I blew up the blocks at the right with the vertical edge to show how many pixels are blurred for each. To quantify the amount I just simply counted the blurred pixels.

The number of pixels blurred for each is the same as the linear resolution difference for each (about 28%). Therefore, the acuity loss is the proportionally the same!

Andre Affleck Senior Member • Posts: 2,362
Another example

Here is another example between the D800 and the 5DIII. If I shoot hand held with the D800 and motion blur reduces my resolving power to 18 MP (lower than a 5DIII), had I shot with a 5DIII, that same motion blur would have reduced the resolving power of the 5DIII to 10MP. I still maintain the resolution advantage of 80% more MP with the D800!

Here are unblurred 100% crops, clearly showing the resolution advantage of the D800.

Here are both receiving the same amount of motion blur, 5 pixels for the 5DIII and about 6 for the D800, to approximate the linear resolution difference.

Notice that both loose about the same amount of detail (proportionately) due to the the blur. Therefore, the resolution advantage is still maintained even with motion blur. The statements made by DPR should have also been made to the 5DII when that high res sensor debuted. Prudent technique is required to get the most resolving power out of any sensor.

stany buyle Senior Member • Posts: 1,957
I'll listen to pro photographers...

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

Nikon & DPR suggest using a tripod, mirror-up, and a remote.

For highest possible sharpness, -landscape, macro and studio-, yes, for real life shooting, mostly no.

If you're working, then do it right. If you're just monkeying around in the backyard with bugs, then enjoy the camera.

Just imagine during a wedding lugging around with a tripod, remote and shooting mirror-up, you would miss the right moments...

"Capture the moment" is much more important for a real pro than ultimate sharpness. Ultimate shapness is for studio work, landscape, macro and... brickwall testers who mostly don't know anything about photography.

And up to that, if you have a good shooting technique, shooting handhold with D800 while getting great sharpness is absolutely no problem.

-- hide signature --

Kindest regards.
Stany Buyle
http://www.nikonuser.info

I like better one good picture in a day than 10 bad ones in a second..

 stany buyle's gear list:stany buyle's gear list
Nikon D1
marike6 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,088
Re: Dispelling the handheld blur myth.... D800 + 105 VR

This idea that you can't make sharp hand-held images at slow shutter speeds with the D800 is simply FUD created by the Canon forum guys to try to detract from the awesome-ness that is the D800. The other day in a thread there, this gentleman was insisting that you could never shoot below 1/80 with the D800!!! This is utter nonsense that people who have never shot with the new Nikon say out of desperation to find something wrong with this camera.

Not only can you make images with good sharpness at shutter speeds like 1/500 in Russ's image, but I've managed to get images with no motion blur at extremely slow shutter speeds like 1/30 as in this low-light grab shot of my cat.

Clearly with an 85mm lens, these are not the kinds of shutter speeds I would normally want, but I did it just to show that there is no issue in this area with the D800.

And there is no major difference in ease of hand-holding with the D800 vs my previous camera, the 5D2. None.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
RBFresno
RBFresno Forum Pro • Posts: 12,651
I'll listen to pro photographers...(who'll typically be using a D4)

"Capture the moment" is much more important for a real pro than ultimate sharpness. Ultimate shapness is for studio work, landscape, macro and... brickwall testers who mostly don't know anything about photography.

Right.

Which is why you'll find most pros opting for a D4 instead of the D800

RB

http://www.dpreview.com/members/2305099006/challenges
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

 RBFresno's gear list:RBFresno's gear list
Nikon D2H Nikon D4 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +17 more
Biological_Viewfinder Senior Member • Posts: 2,207
I'll say it one more time

If you want the most sharpness possible, then it's got to be mirror-up, on a tripod, with a remote. If you are going to shoot a wedding or something like that; then of course not. For me, the real world is the one we live in; the fake world is all this bs that we put over it, the buildings, the people, the cars, the roads, the disgusting graffetti and garbage. The real world for me, is the one where I take my time and get a picture of a stump, with a creek beyond it, and a water fall beyond that. That's the real world for me.

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

DANdeMAN
DANdeMAN Senior Member • Posts: 1,001
Film photography

The argument that more pixel = more prone to motion blur is like saying that 50ASA film (handheld) was more prone to motion blur than the 3200ASA film... Somehow, having more grain(pixels) makes them magically more sensitive to motion?
Never heard of that when I was shooting film...Did you?

Regards
Daniel
--

DANdeMAN SONY V3 (03-2005) - D800E on pre-order

 DANdeMAN's gear list:DANdeMAN's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Samyang 14mm F2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical +10 more
Jim Gilley Forum Member • Posts: 66
Re: Film photography

A couple of things I would like to bring up for discussion...

First, should it not be theoretically possible to remove motion blur during post processing? I seem to remember Adobe "faking" such a thing in a demo of a very early internal beta of Photoshop CS6. Sadly this feature never reached production, but still, I have a feeling that like blur due to incorrect focus, blur due to camera/subject motion can likewise be theoretically eliminated (and therefore eliminated in practice some day).

Second, there is little doubt that if you want crisp sharpness down to the pixel level, then a 36MP camera will require better technique than a 24MP camera. This is simply because a given amount of motion on the sensor (let's say 50 microns for example) equates to more pixels ( 10px) on the 36MP sensor than on the 24MP sensor ( 8px). That said, if you were to down-sample both images to 12MP, they should appear identical in terms of blur or lack thereof.

Third, I have found in practice that it is indeed possible to get all 36MP worth of detail hand-held with a 50mm lens for a stationary subject. One just has to choose an appropriate shutter speed and hold as still as possible.

Andre Affleck Senior Member • Posts: 2,362
Re: Film photography

Jim Gilley wrote:

Second, there is little doubt that if you want crisp sharpness down to the pixel level, then a 36MP camera will require better technique than a 24MP camera. This is simply because a given amount of motion on the sensor (let's say 50 microns for example) equates to more pixels ( 10px) on the 36MP sensor than on the 24MP sensor ( 8px).

No, because the 36MP sensor with more pixel level blur also has more resolution. A blur of 10px for the 36 MP and 8px for the 24MP sensor would give you exact same acuity loss already (proportionately). There is no need for better technique because they are already the same. Remember, the blur in pixels does not have to be the same for there to be an equal acuity loss.

That said, if you were to down-sample both images to 12MP, they should appear identical in terms of blur or lack thereof.

Actually, if you downsample both images after doing what you said (using better technique to reduce motion blur on the 36MP camera) the downsampled 36MP image would look sharper. Only if the same techniques were used to give the same physical motion blur (8px and 10px for each respective sensor) would the images look identical.

5tve Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Re: Film photography

Jim Gilley wrote:

A couple of things I would like to bring up for discussion...

First, should it not be theoretically possible to remove motion blur during post processing? I seem to remember Adobe "faking" such a thing in a demo of a very early internal beta of Photoshop CS6. Sadly this feature never reached production, but still, I have a feeling that like blur due to incorrect focus, blur due to camera/subject motion can likewise be theoretically eliminated (and therefore eliminated in practice some day).

There are plugins for Photoshop that sharpen using deconvolution. I've had some success with Focus Magic does not work well on most images but when it does its Magic.
http://www.focusmagic.com/
I believe Photoshops Smart Sharpen remove lens blur uses deconvolution as well.

I seem to remember reading some speculation that deconvolution might be used to remove the effects of the AA filter in a raw converter.

I don't think the Adobe demo was faked ? they did hope to have it ready for the CS6 launch , hopefully as soon as they squash the bugs we'll get it in a CS6 update.

Second, there is little doubt that if you want crisp sharpness down to the pixel level, then a 36MP camera will require better technique than a 24MP camera. This is simply because a given amount of motion on the sensor (let's say 50 microns for example) equates to more pixels ( 10px) on the 36MP sensor than on the 24MP sensor ( 8px). That said, if you were to down-sample both images to 12MP, they should appear identical in terms of blur or lack thereof.

Third, I have found in practice that it is indeed possible to get all 36MP worth of detail hand-held with a 50mm lens for a stationary subject. One just has to choose an appropriate shutter speed and hold as still as possible.

In low light conditions I often try & keep the ISO as low as possible which usually means slower speeds than 1/fl thats when good hand holding technique is rewarded, there will be blurry shots but if I shoot a burst of 4 or 5 shots I'm almost guaranteed to have a couple that are sharp.

On my D700 I've found that using the grip I can get away with a lower shutter speed by resting the camera on my shoulder the greater mass probably helps as well.

 5tve's gear list:5tve's gear list
Nikon D7000 Sony a6000 OnePlus One
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads