a7r firmware for shutter shock

[Erik Magnuson]

focal length is irrelevant, because the vibration is caused by the camera body, not the lens...

It depends on the lens two ways: lens weight & size changes the resonance of the system and the amount of blur for same shake.

A7r http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4450. More links at the bottom of here http://blog.kasson.com/?p=3757

D810 EFCS difference: 50mm http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6618 vs 135mm. http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6638

 

[TommieH]

focal length is irrelevant, because the vibration is caused by the camera body, not the lens...

It depends on the lens two ways: lens weight & size changes the resonance of the system and the amount of blur for same shake.

A7r http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4450. More links at the bottom of here http://blog.kasson.com/?p=3757

D810 EFCS difference: 50mm http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6618 vs 135mm. http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6638

--
Erik

Quote from the article for the people refusing to read links, this is from the FE 55mm test:

At 1/160, things take a bad turn, and there’s degradation in the horizontal lines as well as the vertical ones (image in post).

Things remain about the same until 1/80, which is the worst performing shutter speed. Even at 1/80 there is enough contrast at the sensel pitch to cause false color artifacts (image in post).

As the shutter speeds get slower from 1/80, there is gradual improvement. It looks like this at 1/5.

Bottom line? Yes, there is shutter-shock degradation with the Sony 55 even on a sturdy set of carbon fiber legs and a good head. It’s not terrible, though. If the Zony weren’t such a sharp lens, it would be hard to see.

So yes, the shutter shock in the A7r is a problem if one care about IQ which one should do if one would be buying such a camera (else there's the A7). If people didn't care about IQ it stands to reason that they wouldn't even bother about even thinking of buying the A7r.

--
Tommie
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tommiehansen/

 

[JohnK]

it's quite known that Sony never adds new important camera features in firmware updates.

What about the e-mount lens firmware upgrades? Sure improved my slow focusing SEL5018! I rarely used it before because it was so "hunty", now it's my main lens on a6000. Pretty important feature, to me anyways, gotta hand it to 'em for that.

Or what about the firmware upgrade for the NEX-5n that did all this:

Improvements over version 1.01:

• Provides support for the SELP1650 automatic compensation compliant lens
• Updates the RAW data format version
  After installing this update, distortion correction of RAW data is available with Image Data Converter version 4.2 or later
• Adds bracket shooting exposure settings (three frames / 1.0EV, 2.0EV, 3.0EV)
• Enables the SELP1650 lens to retract immediately after turning off the camera
• Improves stability for autofocus operations

Benefits provided by previous updates and included in version 1.02:

• Improves the AF response for situations where the distance of the subject changes considerably
• Improves stability when operating the camera using the [Lens Compensation: Distortion] "Auto" and [Picture Effect] "Miniature" settings at the same time
• Improves camera operations when using the [Exposure Compensation] and [Intelligent AF] settings

I'd say the bracket shooting alone is a new important camera feature. I think you are uninformed saying that Sony never adds new important features in firmware updates.

 

[TommieH]

it's quite known that Sony never adds new important camera features in firmware updates.

• Adds bracket shooting exposure settings (three frames / 1.0EV, 2.0EV, 3.0EV)

Sure, yet much of the things you mention like bracketing is half assed (google it).


--
Tommie

Loading…

www.flickr.com

 

[osv]

focal length is irrelevant, because the vibration is caused by the camera body, not the lens...

It depends on the lens two ways: lens weight & size changes the resonance of the system and the amount of blur for same shake.

those are extraneous factors, that are all present regardless of what camera body is used... same category as user error, tripod mounting system, wind shake, technique, etc.

any given camera body will always generate roughly the same degree of vibration at a given shutter speed, period... focal length is not the slightest bit relevant to what the camera body does, because the vibration generated by the body is completely independent of the lens.

in other words, the lens doesn't tell the camera body: "o.k., i'm a 500mm lens, so you need to increase the amount of shutter vibration that you are generating" :-/ :-D

how the vibration is enhanced or mitigated after it's generated is what you are referring to... and as such, it can be altered.

you can't change the source of the vibration.

 

[osv]

So yes, the shutter shock in the A7r is a problem if one care about IQ

it's been made very clear that:

1)whatever issues you think that you see are only present in a narrow range of shutter speed, 2)the a7r is no different than thousands of other camera bodies that have been sold over the years.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

focal length is irrelevant, because the vibration is caused by the camera body, not the lens...

It depends on the lens two ways: lens weight & size changes the resonance of the system and the amount of blur for same shake.

those are extraneous factors, that are all present regardless of what camera body is used... same category as user error, tripod mounting system, wind shake, technique, etc.

You have an odd definition of "extraneous."

any given camera body will always generate roughly the same degree of vibration at a given shutter speed, period...

You've not studied mechanical engineering, I see. Hint: why does adding a sandbag weight to a tripod (or a beanbag on top of a lens) change the amount of vibration?

you can't change the source of the vibration.

No, only it's impact on the system.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

2)the a7r is no different than thousands of other camera bodies that have been sold over the years.

There are differences in degree. What you are saying is like claiming all cars vibrate when driven down a rough road, so there is no reason to choose based on ride.

The best analogy from the auto world is the phrase "your mileage may vary depending on how you drive."

 

[osv]

focal length is irrelevant, because the vibration is caused by the camera body, not the lens...

It depends on the lens two ways: lens weight & size changes the resonance of the system and the amount of blur for same shake.

those are extraneous factors, that are all present regardless of what camera body is used... same category as user error, tripod mounting system, wind shake, technique, etc.

You have an odd definition of "extraneous."

not sure about you, but english is my primary language.

" existing on or coming from the outside <extraneous light>"

as in, the vibration wasn't generated by the lens, it came from an extraneous source; the camera body.

any given camera body will always generate roughly the same degree of vibration at a given shutter speed, period...

You've not studied mechanical engineering, I see. Hint: why does adding a sandbag weight to a tripod (or a beanbag on top of a lens) change the amount of vibration?

you aren't listening.

hint: if the bare lens is mounted on the tripod, no camera body, would you still put a sandbag on the tripod?

you can't change the source of the vibration.

No, only it's impact on the system.

no, you can also change the shutter speed, which completely removes "shutter shock" as an impact on the system, regardless of what focal length is used.

 

[osv]

2)the a7r is no different than thousands of other camera bodies that have been sold over the years.

There are differences in degree. What you are saying is like claiming all cars vibrate when driven down a rough road, so there is no reason to choose based on ride.

your own link, that you posted, indicates that both the d800 and the a7r have shutter-related vibration.

which confirms exactly what i just said.

 

[Godfrey]

Another thing I discovered is that when fitted with longer lenses and using longer focal length lenses, the EFCS will cause some darkening at the top of the image. I suspect this is due to not being able to keep up properly with the nominal shutter speed due to sensor readout IO timing, but I'm still a little perplexed about why it only shows up when using longer focal lengths as opposed to all focal lengths. I find it is a factor at 1/2500 to 1/8000 second with lenses 135mm and longer. Turn off EFCS on the A7 and the darkening is eliminated.

I do see this when using telescopes with no diafragm and some long non-Sony lenses, but not with the G 70-400 mm or FE 70-200 mm lens. Luckily this is within the range where shutter shock does not affect sharpness noticeable. I just have to remember to set the EFC to ON after using my long on-Sony lenses ... ;-)

That's interesting. I only use the A7 as a body for my Leica R (and some old favorite Nikkor) lenses. I see the EFCS darkening with 135, 180, and 600mm teles only.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

2)the a7r is no different than thousands of other camera bodies that have been sold over the years.

There are differences in degree. What you are saying is like claiming all cars vibrate when driven down a rough road, so there is no reason to choose based on ride.

your own link, that you posted, indicates that both the d800 and the a7r have shutter-related vibration.

which confirms exactly what i just said.

And it has identical impact on all cameras? You claim English as a native language but you exhibit rather selective understanding skills.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

not sure about you, but english is my primary language.

" existing on or coming from the outside <extraneous light>"

Try one of the other common definitions. Yours is #2 but both 1 & 3 are more relevant to the discussion.

1. irrelevant or unrelated to the subject being dealt with
2. of external origin
3. separate from the object to which it is attached.

 

[Nordstjernen]

Comments like maybe Sony will rename the camera to an a7r-II with a firmware update are dumb, don't answer the question,

No humor allowed here! :-D

I apologize. I thought you were being snarky.

And I apologize if you was offended by my answer. Humor on web forums might be risky, and so making jokes about gear and especially one's own brand, so I try to use smileys to avoid misunderstandings. Doesn't always work, though. ;-)

 

[osv]

2)the a7r is no different than thousands of other camera bodies that have been sold over the years.

There are differences in degree. What you are saying is like claiming all cars vibrate when driven down a rough road, so there is no reason to choose based on ride.

your own link, that you posted, indicates that both the d800 and the a7r have shutter-related vibration.

which confirms exactly what i just said.

And it has identical impact on all cameras? You claim English as a native language but you exhibit rather selective understanding skills.

it's the most relevant example there is; they are both first-gen products, i think, and both have the same 36mp sensor; they both vibrate.

if you had ever shot film, my point would have been perfectly clear.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

it's the most relevant example there is; they are both first-gen products, i think, and both have the same 36mp sensor; they both vibrate.

Magnitude still means nothing to you?

if you had ever shot film, my point would have been perfectly clear.

Only for 40 years or so. A Pentax 67 vibrates a lot differently from a Olympus OM-1 -- or did you never experience this?

--
Erik

 

[osv]

not sure about you, but english is my primary language.

" existing on or coming from the outside <extraneous light>"

Try one of the other common definitions. Yours is #2 but both 1 & 3 are more relevant to the discussion.

1. irrelevant or unrelated to the subject being dealt with
2. of external origin
3. separate from the object to which it is attached.

i gave the #1 example:

1: existing on or coming from the outside <extraneous light>

2a : not forming an essential or vital part <extraneousornamentation>b : having no relevance <an extraneous digression>

3: being a number obtained in solving an equation that is not a solution of the equation <extraneous roots>

Loading…

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[Erik Magnuson]

i gave the #1 example:

1: existing on or coming from the outside <extraneous light>

2a : not forming an essential or vital part <extraneousornamentation>b : having no relevance <an extraneous digression>

3: being a number obtained in solving an equation that is not a solution of the equation <extraneous roots>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extraneous

So you agree there is more than one definition. What are we talking about? The impact on an image. Do you form an image without a lens? If not, then how is the lens "outside" of the system making the image?

BTW, this is also the answer to the sandbag question. If you are not making an image, then shake doesn't matter.

--
Erik

 

[osv]

it's the most relevant example there is; they are both first-gen products, i think, and both have the same 36mp sensor; they both vibrate.

Magnitude still means nothing to you?

relevance means nothing to you?

the link you posted indicates that the d800 may have a bigger vibration problem than the a7r does.

so apparently magnitude doesn't really matter to you either.

if you had ever shot film, my point would have been perfectly clear.

Only for 40 years or so. A Mamiya RB67 vibrates a lot differently from a Olympus OM-1 -- or did you never experience this?

cameras vibrating proves what i just said.

why do i always have to be the one to bring up "shutter shock" in other cameras, when noobs attack the a7r platform.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

relevance means nothing to you?

It means a lot - the two concepts (magnitude and relevance) are related.

the link you posted indicates that the d800 may have a bigger vibration problem than the a7r does.

Do you understand the units of those graphs?

so apparently magnitude doesn't really matter to you either.

No, because the answer to the question above for me is "yes".

why do i always have to be the one to bring up "shutter shock" in other cameras, when noobs attack the a7r platform.

Some "other" platforms also have a mode to eliminate shutter shock. Some systems have more mass relative to the momentum and have a different balance point so that shutter shock impacts images less. A few are worse than the A7R.

--
Erik