How to Test for Shutter Shock?

[gnewylliw]

Excellent post and thread!

It's just sad to see that we now have to resort to holding the camera in a specific way to make the best of the fantastically sharp lens.

 

[Anders W]

Excellent post and thread!

It's just sad to see that we now have to resort to holding the camera in a specific way to make the best of the fantastically sharp lens.

Thanks. Adjusting your camera-holding a bit is perhaps the smallest price to pay. And if that was a panacea (it is a help but not a full solution), my complaints would be minor. Hopefully, though, the whole problem will disappear in a not very distant future, thanks to the appearance of a rolling electronic shutter (Pany bodies already have that), a first-curtain electronic shutter (some Sony and Canon cameras already have that), and eventually a global electronic shutter that can replace the mechanical shutter altogether.

 

[Greynerd]

A search for 'shutter shock' in DPR returns 87 News and Reviews results, 8,037 forum posts and 1 member called 'shutter shock'.

It is a well thrashed subject.

Take some hand held shots between 60th and 160th of a second and magnify the images at 400%. Check for vertical ghost images. This is best tested with very fine and contrasty horizontal lines in your test motive. Power lines against the sky work well and you should use a longer focal length like the 45/1.8

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lighthunter_de/

Come on your making that up.

The search engines have nothing on "Shutter shock"

 

[Anders W]

A search for 'shutter shock' in DPR returns 87 News and Reviews results, 8,037 forum posts and 1 member called 'shutter shock'.

It is a well thrashed subject.

Take some hand held shots between 60th and 160th of a second and magnify the images at 400%. Check for vertical ghost images. This is best tested with very fine and contrasty horizontal lines in your test motive. Power lines against the sky work well and you should use a longer focal length like the 45/1.8

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lighthunter_de/

Come on your making that up.

The search engines have nothing on "Shutter shock"

Beaten to death since at least a year. I guess the main reason why it keeps popping up is the steady flow of newcomers who are not yet familiar with the content of past discussions.

 

[gnewylliw]

In the mean time, it'd be worth-while to get a good idea of this is more of a sample variation issue or body-wise. that'll affect if you might try to exchange, or just return/not buy the e-m1 in the first place. it's hard to tell at this point, but I'm counting on the first option!

A search for 'shutter shock' in DPR returns 87 News and Reviews results, 8,037 forum posts and 1 member called 'shutter shock'.

It is a well thrashed subject.

 

[Nacha]

related to individual units. I understand how there can be variability between individual units, but, for example, my testing of my camera I don't see ss (e-m1). but we could not rule out that It could be a problem for other e-m1 units. I guess the question is then would ss be design issue, manufacturing issue, user technique, or a combination all?

 

[Anders W]

related to individual units. I understand how there can be variability between individual units, but, for example, my testing of my camera I don't see ss (e-m1). but we could not rule out that It could be a problem for other e-m1 units. I guess the question is then would ss be design issue, manufacturing issue, user technique, or a combination all?

I am not sure that anyone (except, possibly, the manufacturers) has a really good answer to that question I am afraid. But I personally don't believe that, as a rule, there is any copy-to-copy variation to speak of with regard to this problem. Furthermore, I think I have never seen a report from some user who sent the body for repair or had it exchanged based on shutter-shock issues who found that the problem was fixed after repair/exchange. So by and large, I would say it's a design issue whose impact depends on the lens used and user technique/ability with regard to hand-holding. How much of a problem you see is additionally likely to depend on how picky you are with regard to sharpness and how carefully you test.

 

[Zaptrax]

Tested my E-M1 using a focus target chart and as I suspected there is no problem whatsoever. Perhaps other cameras have the problem but I remain skeptical given the testing methodology I've seen being used by others.

 

[gnewylliw]

that's what important though, that yours satisfies your needs and expectations

Tested my E-M1 using a focus target chart and as I suspected there is no problem whatsoever. Perhaps other cameras have the problem but I remain skeptical given the testing methodology I've seen being used by others.

 

[DonSC]

Excellent post and thread!

It's just sad to see that we now have to resort to holding the camera in a specific way to make the best of the fantastically sharp lens.

I went to the blog you cited which claims to have established shutter shock with the Oly 75-300 at all shutter speeds between 1/100 - 1/200. Though I knew what the results would be, I wasted my time taping newspaper up and took shots using that lens both handheld and on a tripod. Guess what? All the shots looked like this:


Oly 75-300 on tripod

I did, however, run into one problem. I don't have the same setup in aperture priority as I do in shutter priority. In aperture priority I can easy separate focus. In shutter priority I use the half press method. Guess what? When using shutter priority the camera tried to reacquire focus, couldn't lock it, and gave me this mess:


Shutter priority --> no focus --> horrible mess

Now, the site you think is so great at establishing shutter shock may have gotten the world's worst copy of the 75-300 lens OR the world's worst copy of the E-M5 OR both. But when I'm looking at the results they look a lot more like a lack of focus than shutter shock.

All I can tell you is that the E-M5 and E-M1 allow me to shoot at slower shutter speeds than my Canon bodies using L stabilized lenses and that I have never experienced shutter shock in the four or five years I've been shooting the m43 bodies. Given this experience, I don't see any foundation for your complaining about how you have to go through any special gyrations to get sharp shots with m43 gear.

 

[Anders W]

Excellent post and thread!

It's just sad to see that we now have to resort to holding the camera in a specific way to make the best of the fantastically sharp lens.

I went to the blog you cited which claims to have established shutter shock with the Oly 75-300 at all shutter speeds between 1/100 - 1/200. Though I knew what the results would be, I wasted my time taping newspaper up and took shots using that lens both handheld and on a tripod. Guess what? All the shots looked like this:


Oly 75-300 on tripod

I did, however, run into one problem. I don't have the same setup in aperture priority as I do in shutter priority. In aperture priority I can easy separate focus. In shutter priority I use the half press method. Guess what? When using shutter priority the camera tried to reacquire focus, couldn't lock it, and gave me this mess:


Shutter priority --> no focus --> horrible mess

Now, the site you think is so great at establishing shutter shock may have gotten the world's worst copy of the 75-300 lens OR the world's worst copy of the E-M5 OR both. But when I'm looking at the results they look a lot more like a lack of focus than shutter shock.

All I can tell you is that the E-M5 and E-M1 allow me to shoot at slower shutter speeds than my Canon bodies using L stabilized lenses and that I have never experienced shutter shock in the four or five years I've been shooting the m43 bodies. Given this experience, I don't see any foundation for your complaining about how you have to go through any special gyrations to get sharp shots with m43 gear.

You need to work on your observational capability. Blur due to lack of focus does not look the same as blur due to camera shake. The blog you refer to, i.e., this

http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.ca/2012/09/micro-43-shutter-shock-revisited-omd-em.html

shows blur due to camera shake. What you show is blur due to lack of focus. An important difference is that blur due to camera shake is typically stronger in some directions than in others. When it is due to shutter shock, the direction is predominantly vertical (when shooting in landscape orientation). As you can see, the example in the blog shows far more blur vertically than horizontally whereas your example does not.

 

[gnewylliw]

also, that pic is at 1/200. try it at 1/40, 1/60, 1/120

 

[DonSC]

also, that pic is at 1/200. try it at 1/40, 1/60, 1/120

you'd notice that I took a series of shots between 1/100 and 1/200. I just didn't want to waste bandwidth by posting stupid shots of newspapers which showed .... nothing. Using EXACTLY the same lens and camera as he did I can't even begin to reproduce what he shows.

FYI I got the same result with the E-M1 and the E-M5.

 

[gnewylliw]

hmm this is quite strange then. the OP from one of the posts replied with a replacement E-M1

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52497074

no way diffraction can explain this. and at 9mm and 1/250, hand shake would be close to impossible...

what we could be seeing is a less severe problem in yours? it's hard to deny there's something going on at 1/40 and 1/60, which had even escaped your eyes. nonetheless it exists

 

[DonSC]

shows blur due to camera shake. What you show is blur due to lack of focus. An important difference is that blur due to camera shake is typically stronger in some directions than in others. When it is due to shutter shock, the direction is predominantly vertical (when shooting in landscape orientation). As you can see, the example in the blog shows far more blur vertically than horizontally whereas your example does not.

Ha ha. The point is that I can't begin to reproduce the mess he gets unless I really work at it. I'm sure if I tried to take a blurry photo I could do that, but it's not happening under the conditions and with the same equipment he says he used.

 

[gnewylliw]

DonSC wrote

Ha ha. The point is that I can't begin to reproduce the mess he gets unless I really work at it. I'm sure if I tried to take a blurry photo I could do that, but it's not happening under the conditions and with the same equipment he says he used.

so what's your point? your camera either has little or no blurring at said shutter speeds, congrats..

 

[DonSC]

no way diffraction can explain this. and at 9mm and 1/250, hand shake would be close to impossible...

what we could be seeing is a less severe problem in yours? it's hard to deny there's something going on at 1/40 and 1/60, which had even escaped your eyes. nonetheless it exists

I'm not sure where the 9mm and 1/250 come from. The web site says: I mounted the camera/lens unit on a tripod, set the focal length to 300 mm and made a sequence of exposures from 1/8 sec to 1/400 sec. Settings were IBIS off, Timer delay at 2 seconds. There was clearly apparent blur with double imaging from 1/100 - 1/200 sec.

To try and reproduce this I simply used the 75-300 at 300mm and shutter speeds between 1/100 and 1/200 which is the shutter speed he said produced the double imaging.

Another poster uploaded a blurry photo which he said was produced when using the Oly 9-18 lens on an E-M1. Since I have that lens, I went out and, using the 9-18 lens and the same shutter speed he used, tried to reproduce his result. My shot, which I posted a couple of hours after he posted his, was in focus and showed no double imaging or blur.

I lived through the Canon 1DIII release, where the body did have a focusing issues. That one was very different than what I'm seeing here. In that case professional reviewers picked up on the problem immediately. Here that's not happening. If there was a general problem as bad as this more than one reviewer would have noticed it. The Oly 75-300 lens is one of the few telephotos available, and, as slow as it is, it's highly likely they would have ended up shooting at least some between 1/100 and 1/200.

 

[DonSC]

What's the point? The same point you get when scientists in Utah claim they've developed cold fusion and other scientists can't reproduce it.

 

[gnewylliw]

let me repost the link: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52497074

9mm 1/250.

To try and reproduce this I simply used the 75-300 at 300mm and shutter speeds between 1/100 and 1/200 which is the shutter speed he said produced the double imaging.

Another poster uploaded a blurry photo which he said was produced when using the Oly 9-18 lens on an E-M1. Since I have that lens, I went out and, using the 9-18 lens and the same shutter speed he used, tried to reproduce his result. My shot, which I posted a couple of hours after he posted his, was in focus and showed no double imaging or blur.

in summary; two other people separately claimed to have almost identical issues. but you go out and test in the same situation as both of them and find no problems. plus one of them gets a replacement camera, finds the exact same issue. if i were you i'd just count my lucky stars.

in the end what is your point? they're both lying? applying some ridiculous camera shake? the crappiest m4/3 sample lens in the world?

also, RealPancho confidently posted his sample images to show there was no SS..but upon closer inspection there was definetely more blur at some shutter speeds (ofc I can't make the jugement that it was SS or whatever but still...) . not to question your observation or anything.

 

[Anders W]

shows blur due to camera shake. What you show is blur due to lack of focus. An important difference is that blur due to camera shake is typically stronger in some directions than in others. When it is due to shutter shock, the direction is predominantly vertical (when shooting in landscape orientation). As you can see, the example in the blog shows far more blur vertically than horizontally whereas your example does not.

Ha ha. The point is that I can't begin to reproduce the mess he gets unless I really work at it. I'm sure if I tried to take a blurry photo I could do that, but it's not happening under the conditions and with the same equipment he says he used.

I am afraid the laugh is all on you. Clearly, you don't know how to test things, nor how to evaluate the results. Just the fact that you shot your test at ISO 3200 says it all really.

I get blur due to shutter shock when shooting my E-M5 on a tripod with my 100-300 at the long end. But it will be very subtle in this case and you need good light, low ISO, and a discriminating target to see it.

BTW: Since you apparently don't know what a sharp shot at 300 mm really looks like, here's an example. This is a 100 percent crop (click on "view original size to see it at 100 percent).

Feel free to compare with yours, enlarged to 100 percent view, here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52487775