Shutter shock issues on the 5DS

SHood wrote:

This should not come as a surprise as all high density sensors are having this issue, especially with longer lenses.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3639917149/cp-2015-nikon-interview-we-learned-from-the-d600-episode#comments

"all high resolution offerings from all brands exhibit deleterious interactions between mirror/shutter vibrations and optical stabilization systems (our initial tests of the Canon EOS 5DS show that it is no exception)."

"Because that's what we see with the venerable 70-200 F2.8L II IS on a 5DS at 200mm with IS on shooting through the OVF (at all shutter speeds between 1/125s and 1/2s)."

Meh.

It's reasonably well known amongst capable photographers that to get the very best from these pixel dense sensors you need to employ technique AND the best glass.

Still, even if you don't, you'll still be no worse off than someone using the same techniques and exposures with a lower pixel density. And this is an important point that tends to be not mentioned or glossed over by some!

Nice sensationalist headline it may be, but, in actual fact, it's really nothing much at all to worry about, just something to be aware of and allow for when the very maximum resolution that the sensor can provide must be obtained. (and frankly, that's nothing new either!)

schmegg wrote:

SHood wrote:

This should not come as a surprise as all high density sensors are having this issue, especially with longer lenses.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3639917149/cp-2015-nikon-interview-we-learned-from-the-d600-episode#comments

"all high resolution offerings from all brands exhibit deleterious interactions between mirror/shutter vibrations and optical stabilization systems (our initial tests of the Canon EOS 5DS show that it is no exception)."

"Because that's what we see with the venerable 70-200 F2.8L II IS on a 5DS at 200mm with IS on shooting through the OVF (at all shutter speeds between 1/125s and 1/2s)."

Still, even if you don't, you'll still be no worse off than someone using the same techniques and exposures with a lower pixel density. And this is an important point that tends to be not mentioned or glossed over by some!

That is true presuming the 5Ds doesn't have a unique vibration issue; since it's not out yet we can't know the answer to that. The 36MP A7r's shutter vibration causes it to produce images with lower measured resolution than the 24MP A7 with certain stabilized lenses.

SHood wrote:

I am glad that dpreview is investigating this further as many photographers are still not aware of this issue or think that it won't impact them. Dpreview plans on posting an article on it in the next couple of weeks that should go into further detail.

Here are a few more comments from dpreview in the comments section.

"But I'm glad you brought this up - there needs to be more awareness of it. We're shortly publishing a comprehensive piece showing what you describe - and it's not just limited to that particular lens, nor to that body/brand."

"The fact that most people think it's 'not typical' is exactly why I'm glad this was brought up by the OP- b/c it is typical if you're shooting hi-res FF w/ IS lenses at long focal lengths at those shutter speeds."

"I'll give you a concrete example- recently I asked a well-known wildlife photographer if he'd encountered this issue. He said 'no', but was kind enough to send me some full-res files. I saw it immediately, but probably only b/c I'd been looking for vertical shake extensively recently from doing all these tests. Yet he'd missed it in thousands of his own shots.

IOW, if you don't know what you're looking for, you'll often see this in the real world as just a shot that requires more sharpening, or slightly misfocused, or slight motion blur, or combination thereof. And remember, it's mostly within that particular shutter speed range, which isn't exactly a range wildlife photogs use."

Some of those comments are triggered there by my remarks, if I remember well. To understand them, you need the context.

There are two different issues here:

1. There was a specific issue with that particular Nikon lens, and with certain batch, according to Nikon. The blur was very different that what you see in the DPR tests - a ghost image. Nikon issued a recall, case closed.
2. Shutter shock is not a new problem; this is why Canon and other manufacturers have electronic first curtain. We know well that "silent mode" works better than just MLU. Does IS/VR interact with it - it should, that is why it is there. It may make it worse, or not, etc.

Just because (2) is true it does not mean that (1) is typical.

…which have the about the same pixel density. Why are FF cameras treated like they present some kind of special, unique case? I've shot with a D7100 (24mp APS-C, so higher pixel density than the 5DS) and a 300 f/2.8 with no issues, so I don't think you can reasonably state that it affects ALL high resolution cameras.

Slideshow Bob wrote:

…which have the about the same pixel density. Why are FF cameras treated like they present some kind of special, unique case? I've shot with a D7100 (24mp APS-C, so higher pixel density than the 5DS) and a 300 f/2.8 with no issues, so I don't think you can reasonably state that it affects ALL high resolution cameras.

Because given the same FOV, a FF sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C sensor will have more pixels per AOV and thus more blur per unit of shake/motion.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40651458

Horshack wrote:

Slideshow Bob wrote:

…which have the about the same pixel density. Why are FF cameras treated like they present some kind of special, unique case? I've shot with a D7100 (24mp APS-C, so higher pixel density than the 5DS) and a 300 f/2.8 with no issues, so I don't think you can reasonably state that it affects ALL high resolution cameras.

Because given the same FOV, a FF sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C sensor will have more pixels per AOV and thus more blur per unit of shake/motion.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40651458

Right, I get it. Thanks for that. The only point I would make is that, if NOT equalising the FOV, people should be seeing the same issue with a 70-200 on the 7DII that is being reported on the 5DS, because the AOV per pixel is about the same.

Slideshow Bob wrote:

Horshack wrote:

Slideshow Bob wrote:

…which have the about the same pixel density. Why are FF cameras treated like they present some kind of special, unique case? I've shot with a D7100 (24mp APS-C, so higher pixel density than the 5DS) and a 300 f/2.8 with no issues, so I don't think you can reasonably state that it affects ALL high resolution cameras.

Because given the same FOV, a FF sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C sensor will have more pixels per AOV and thus more blur per unit of shake/motion.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/40651458

Right, I get it. Thanks for that. The only point I would make is that, if NOT equalising the FOV, people should be seeing the same issue with a 70-200 on the 7DII that is being reported on the 5DS, because the AOV per pixel is about the same.

I don't think one can just 'not equalize the FOV', b/c people tend to think about the 1/focal length rule with respect to equivalent focal length, not actual focal length.

So a 200mm lens on a 5DS vs a 7D2... That's 300mm equivalent focal length on the 7D2, and a user might not expect that they can get away with, say, 1/60s on it. But since it's only 200mm equiv on the 5DS, they might think they can get away with 1/60s. Those are just rough numbers; my point is just that user's expectations are calibrated based off of equivalent focal length, not focal length.

Furthermore, smaller sensor cameras have smaller shutters, smaller mirrors, etc. It's entirely possible that also has an effect.

-Rishi

There was a specific issue with that particular Nikon lens

Which lens was it? Do you mean some particular lens sample, or some lens ID?

Iliah Borg wrote:

There was a specific issue with that particular Nikon lens

Which lens was it? Do you mean some particular lens sample, or some lens ID?

The new Nikon 300/4. According to Nikon, it is an issue with a particular range of SN's. Here is a review written before the recall. Here is another report written before the rerecallport, and the comments there are interesting as well. There was enough chatter about that issue and Nikon reacted quickly.

J A C S wrote:

Iliah Borg wrote:

There was a specific issue with that particular Nikon lens

Which lens was it? Do you mean some particular lens sample, or some lens ID?

The new Nikon 300/4.

Right. There was a bug in the protocol between bodies and the lens.

Timbukto wrote:

My EOS-M is a far far better mirrorless camera than most older generation mirrorless (I haven't checked any timelines so I'm not sure what was avail with EOS-M came out). Despite lagging autofocus and DR, its shooting stability is absolutely solid...in fact it has a nice angled shutter release to boot and a tank chassis combined with EFC and very damped shutter. Again a camera largely panned as being 'behind' than its competitors when in truth a ton of its competitors had huge shutter shock issues. I sold my Olympus E-PM2 and still have my EOS-M.

Would you post a link about the M shutter? I got it recently with two lenses, basically for the cost of a nice dinner. I did not buy the adapter yet, so I cannot test it with my (longer) EF lenses.