Fujifilm X-H2S Electronic Shutter Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR)

I usually test mechanical shutter and don't always get electronic shutter too.

As expected there is a slight Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) penalty at low ISO.

What is the reason?  For the simple person?

bclaff wrote:

I usually test mechanical shutter and don't always get electronic shutter too.

As expected there is a slight Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) penalty at low ISO.

Not surprising. On the other hand maybe 1/5th of a stop or less what looks like ISO 640 and then a wash. The benefits of ES seems to outweigh the small loss.

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

That was my thought too, but it must change the way it reads the sensor.  Does electronic first curtain affect IQ?

Alan Sh wrote:

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

Decent explanation by Fujifilm here:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-gb/learning-centre/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/

Bottom line, as I understand it, there remain situations (most often relating to motion photography) where the differences between the two can become very apparent.  It's my understanding that motion related artifacts attributable to ES still exist, even in the latest generation ES implementations.  I'm more than happy to stand corrected if there is updated data that suggests otherwise with newer gen cameras.  A reference to such information -- if it exists -- might be very helpful in answering the questions being raised here.

Meanwhile, out of an abundance of caution, and until I see data to the contrary, I will continue to avoid using ES in any situation where motion is involved.

Jerry-astro wrote:

Alan Sh wrote:

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

Decent explanation by Fujifilm here:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-gb/learning-centre/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/

Bottom line, as I understand it, there remain situations (most often relating to motion photography) where the differences between the two can become very apparent. It's my understanding that motion related artifacts attributable to ES still exist, even in the latest generation ES implementations. I'm more than happy to stand corrected if there is updated data that suggests otherwise with newer gen cameras. A reference to such information -- if it exists -- might be very helpful in answering the questions being raised here.

Meanwhile, out of an abundance of caution, and until I see data to the contrary, I will continue to avoid using ES in any situation where motion is involved.

The link is helpful. Keep in mind the noise difference is very minor compared to issues such as rolling shutter.

In another thread (regarding the X-T5), Bill clarified that EFCS is much closer to MS regarding noise than ES. Beyond that, rolling shutter is almost entirely eliminated with EFCS (the two factors are interconnected).

I think Fuji has done a very good job of integrating auto ES-EFCS-MS at the proper shutter speeds with the majority of shooting situations defaulting to EFCS - for good reason - it consistently yields the best image quality results unless you're using flash.

silentstorm wrote:

Jerry-astro wrote:

Alan Sh wrote:

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

Decent explanation by Fujifilm here:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-gb/learning-centre/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/

Bottom line, as I understand it, there remain situations (most often relating to motion photography) where the differences between the two can become very apparent. It's my understanding that motion related artifacts attributable to ES still exist, even in the latest generation ES implementations. I'm more than happy to stand corrected if there is updated data that suggests otherwise with newer gen cameras. A reference to such information -- if it exists -- might be very helpful in answering the questions being raised here.

Meanwhile, out of an abundance of caution, and until I see data to the contrary, I will continue to avoid using ES in any situation where motion is involved.

How does ES motion artifacts relate to DR?

My comment wasn’t related to DR, but was simply a response to the comment I quoted.  Apologies if that ends up being just a bit OT for this thread.

Jerry-astro wrote:

Alan Sh wrote:

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

Decent explanation by Fujifilm here:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-gb/learning-centre/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/

Bottom line, as I understand it, there remain situations (most often relating to motion photography) where the differences between the two can become very apparent. It's my understanding that motion related artifacts attributable to ES still exist, even in the latest generation ES implementations. I'm more than happy to stand corrected if there is updated data that suggests otherwise with newer gen cameras. A reference to such information -- if it exists -- might be very helpful in answering the questions being raised here.

Meanwhile, out of an abundance of caution, and until I see data to the contrary, I will continue to avoid using ES in any situation where motion is involved.

Focal plane mechanical shutters are rolling shutter just as ES are. In lens leaf shutters do not suffer from rolling shutter. The focal plane mechanical shutter travels as a slit between the two curtains across the sensor. The transit time of the slit is about the same as the flash sync time or more or less 1/250. At faster the shutter speeds the smaller the slit which means it exposes the top part of the sensor prior to the bottom part and that is what leads to rolling shutter.

At 1/1000 for example only the slit is on the order of 1/4 of the top to bottom distance of the shutter so the bottom of the sensor is exposed prior to the top. At high shutter speeds the mechanical shutter will show the effects of rolling shutter - bent baseball bats. bent golf clubs, etc. When the flash sync speeds of the ES and MS are equivalent - there will be no advantage related to rolling shutter with one vs. the other. That is what Nikon based the Z9 design on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmjeCchGRQo

It may very well be that the stacked sensor in the XH2S, Fuji could followed in Nikon's lead and removed the mechanical shutter.  One would have to look at the read out rates to determine that, but I expect both those sensors are from the same generation of the Sony sensor technology.  At one point the read noise penalty from rolling shutter made ES a less attractive.  However, with the modern sensors, the noise temperature of the CMOS circuitry makes this penalty insignificant and only an issue at close to base ISO.

Truman Prevatt wrote:

Jerry-astro wrote:

Alan Sh wrote:

bclaff wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

What is the reason? For the simple person?

Electronic Shutter (ES) read out has higher read noise than Mechanical Shutter (MS).

I must be missing something. I thought ES was just MS without the M - so the mechanical bit just isn't there.

What am I missing? Is there something I can read that explains the actuall mechanisms of ES & MS?

ALan

Decent explanation by Fujifilm here:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-gb/learning-centre/electronic-vs-mechanical-shutter/

Bottom line, as I understand it, there remain situations (most often relating to motion photography) where the differences between the two can become very apparent. It's my understanding that motion related artifacts attributable to ES still exist, even in the latest generation ES implementations. I'm more than happy to stand corrected if there is updated data that suggests otherwise with newer gen cameras. A reference to such information -- if it exists -- might be very helpful in answering the questions being raised here.

Meanwhile, out of an abundance of caution, and until I see data to the contrary, I will continue to avoid using ES in any situation where motion is involved.

Focal plane mechanical shutters are rolling shutter just as ES are. In lens leaf shutters do not suffer from rolling shutter. The focal plane mechanical shutter travels as a slit between the two curtains across the sensor. The transit time of the slit is about the same as the flash sync time or more or less 1/250. At faster the shutter speeds the smaller the slit which means it exposes the top part of the sensor prior to the bottom part and that is what leads to rolling shutter.

At 1/1000 for example only the slit is on the order of 1/4 of the top to bottom distance of the shutter so the bottom of the sensor is exposed prior to the top. At high shutter speeds the mechanical shutter will show the effects of rolling shutter - bent baseball bats. bent golf clubs, etc. When the flash sync speeds of the ES and MS are equivalent - there will be no advantage related to rolling shutter with one vs. the other. That is what Nikon based the Z9 design on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmjeCchGRQo

It may very well be that the stacked sensor in the XH2S, Fuji could followed in Nikon's lead and removed the mechanical shutter. One would have to look at the read out rates to determine that, but I expect both those sensors are from the same generation of the Sony sensor technology. At one point the read noise penalty from rolling shutter made ES a less attractive. However, with the modern sensors, the noise temperature of the CMOS circuitry makes this penalty insignificant and only an issue at close to base ISO.

Appreciate the clarification, Truman, thanks.

Kaoticphoto wrote:

exactly. xh2s can sync at 1/125 when in ES mode, and for usual studio situation is absolutely fine

i use xh2s in ES all the time now, even for Flash photography. i always shoot at low iso and the minimal difference measured in dr it's not visible in real situations at all, even when raising blacks or shadows.

advantage are obvious, no vibrations, no wear on mechanical shutter, fully silent.

Yep it takes the mechanical shutter in the XH2S (and most cameras ) between 4 and 8 msecs to scan the entire sensor.  It takes the ES about the same time in the XHS2 - or else it could not sync to flash at 1/125.

ES and MS are both rolling shutters.  On the XH2S I probably would only use the ES. EFC has some advantages - on the other hand the second curtain is limited to how fact it can move across the sensor so in reality is is also a rolling shutter.  It just mitigates shutter shock from the first curtain.

CMOS sensors because of the processing circularity on chip are going to be quite a while to get to a global shutter.  Stacked sensors help the read out speed.  For a true global shutter the only available today is on a CCD sensor camera.

i use xh2s in ES all the time now, even for Flash photography. i always shoot at low iso and the minimal difference measured in dr it's not visible in real situations at all, even when raising blacks or shadows.

advantage are obvious, no vibrations, no wear on mechanical shutter, fully silent.

——————————————————————-

Do you use ES for shooting fast motion as well? That’s positive to hear if you are. Hopefully the rolling shutter is a non-issue