Shutter Shock a myth

[Nigel Wilkins]

Well I tend to agree about moving on but still I seen others not buy into this system due to the myth. It's sad a system can get a bad rap so quickly over nothing. If I was a Sony engineer I would be banging my head against the wall.

It's a good job you're not a Sony engineer!

Sure its more difficult to get sharp images but it has nothing to do with shutter shock. I think we have all become so spoiled to IS as other features we have forgotten how to take pictures. When you are dealing with a camera this small and put a big lens on it with no IS it takes a little work to get a crisp picture.

As I said earlier, what if I want to use 1/100 sec on a tripod to show limited movement? Avoiding that shutter speed really isn't the answer, especially when it could be avoided with simple firmware changes. I could add weight to the camera, but that kind of defeats the point of having a light weight camera in the first place.

But I see no failures on the cameras part. When I miss focus it my fault and not a moving sensor or a slapping shutter. I think the myth is from the loud shutter sound.

Others see it (& have clearly shown it). Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[DavieK]

I understand needing different settings for different effects. But explain to me how a fixed sensor, made in to the PC board and fixed into the camera can move inside the camera? If the camera is sufficiently supported and secured enough not to move it really doesn't matter how hard the shutter hits or how loud it is. I think if there is an issue at all it's a lens issue.

 

[Djnww]

I agree. I can only assume that there are some badly assembled units out there resulting in shutter shock.

I have had no issues using the A7R handheld. I was surprised to find a 'definitive shutter shock proof' review where blurriness was seen in a photo at 100mm whilst on a tripod, when in fact my handheld shots are a lot sharper.

 

[D Cox]

I agree. I can only assume that there are some badly assembled units out there resulting in shutter shock.

I have had no issues using the A7R handheld. I was surprised to find a 'definitive shutter shock proof' review where blurriness was seen in a photo at 100mm whilst on a tripod, when in fact my handheld shots are a lot sharper.

That seems reasonable to me. Your hands will damp the vibration, while a tripod (especially one with a ball-and-socket head) is more likely to resonate.

In my opinion the only real solution will be for Sony to develop a comparable sensor with an electronic first curtain. Then you can be certain there is no vibration.

 

[Chris Malcolm]

The gist of the shutter shock myth is that *IF* you go look for it, you will find it. If you don't go look for it, you will probably never encounter it. If you encounter it, all you have to do is choose a different shutter speed, which is very well doable with the high-iso capability of the A7r. I think that was what the op already said in his words.

You don't need to go looking for it to see it, as it is viewable at a lot less than 100%. Some people can't see it but some of those same people claim a photo is pin sharp when it is not either. Not that easy if it effects a number of shutter speeds and it waste time having to select new ISO values if you are in the middle of a shoot and you need to avoid certain shutter speeds. That wasted time could be losing you photos and if your a pro, money.

I didn't mean if you go look for it in the photos, I meant if you try to shoot photos with shutter shock effect visible. It only occurs under very very specific situations. Yes, once it's there, obviously it's visible. But as many many many user reports have proven: under normal usage you won't encounter it. Normal here meaning: 1- don't use lenses with IS from another brand, if you have to, disable IS. 2- Always shoot at more than 1/f 3- Don't be an ass about it.

With long lenses I usually use support like a tripod or monopod, and when using such camera supports aleays have IS switched off. I discovered long ago that I get sharper shots like that. I also discovered via careful experimental checking of shutter speed ranges that it wasn’t related to focal length, it was simply that at shutter speeds lower than about 1/300th, with any length of focal length over about 200mm, I couldn't get the sharpness I got outside that danger range.

People insisting there is more to it than this are the people who went looking for it and thought they had found some dealbreaking issue, which it is not, by far.

It might not be deal breaking to you but it is to other people.

Which "other" people are you referring to, the people you are imagining?

Some of them will be people like me. Twenty years ago I didn't know about mirror shake. I discovered it trying to shoot long exposure murals in a dim church. My SLR didn't have mirror lock up. I decided then that in future I'd avoid cameras with mirrors which didn’t have mirror lock or other means of avoiding mirror shock problems. About three years ago I discovered that my problems with lenses over 200mm and shutter speeds less than 1/300th were probably shutter shock. My recent acquisition of a camera with switchable mechanical & electronic shutter proved it conclusively. Being able to switch off shutter shock has made a huge difference to the versatility of my long lenses for wildlife photography. In effect it's given me the equivalent of several extra stops of aperture on my long lenses.

So for me now any kind of mechanical flappery in a camera is a deal breaker. On the other hand I know several professional photographers who’ve never found either of mirror or shutter shock any kind of a problem. They simply don't do the kind of photography which shows up these problems.

 

[Chris Malcolm]

I have been using the a7R, EA-LA4, 70-400mm combo and also the 70-300mm and I am getting really detailed and sharp images. The only thing is you have to go by the old rule when shooting with a zoom. Your shutter speed has to be as high as the focal length. Ect. at 300mm you need to be 1/300th or faster. This images are typical of what I am seeing.

I go back to what I said before if the sensor doesn't move like with the in body IS cameras it's just a matter of getting the camera steady and using a high enough shutter speed.

I sold my E-M1 because of the low amount of keepers I was getting. I can push the ISO so much higher on the a7R there is seldom need of IS.

And what if I want to shoot at 1/100 sec on a tripod for effect? For example, to get a helicopters rotors blurred while keeping the background & people sharp?

 

[captura]

SS is probably a myth with the A7r. No real evidence ever presented, just a lot of babble.

Lots of websites are showing a lot more than just babble.

SS certainly exists with the Olympus cameras...I prevent it on my 2 Olympus cameras by setting up for a 1/8 sec. delay. The improvement is noticeable.

Something which you cannot do on the Sony A7r yet, to be able to access if it makes any difference.

But ...still no evidence.

 

[captura]

If shutter shock exists & I think that there is evidence that it does then it doesn't just affect longer telephoto lenses - it affects all lenses at certain shuter speeds , it's just that the movement affects longer lenses in a more easily seen manner.

I prefer to use low ISO's & often shoot images using the affected shutter speeds & this is a very real deterrent to me getting one of these cameras. The option of using higher ISO's in order to get higher shutter speeds does not seem am acceptable long-term solution to me. In the UK there is not blazing sunshine most of the time which forces us to use ND filters & the like to tame potential over -exposure :-D

The fact that it seems to cause problems with IS systems is a double blow as I personally like to use IS whenever possible. These issues suggest that Sony rushed these cameras to market without properly considering this issue , I just hope that there is a firmware solution to the problem but I fear that there may not be one ?

I have not seen a shred of evidence of shutter shock with the 7r. I've examined all the links including Digilloyd and it's all misinformation, far as I can see, shutter shock is present in my 2 M43 cameras. (E-PL1 and E-PM1.) Putting in the 1/8 sec. delay works. Sorry for introducing this here but to me it is relevant to my point.

But I believe that IS is a separate issue on those cameras. An early 2-dimensional in-camera IBIS system, I have seen it cause very similar vibrations all by itself, (and while the 1/8 sec. delay was ON, ensuring that this occurence was shutter-shock independent.)

Turning off IBIS enhanced the picture effect in the same way as invoking the 1/8 second delay. But I am satisfied that IS effect and shutter-shock are separate issues, on these Olympus cameras.

I cannot speak to a similar effect caused by in-lens IS systems like Sony's OSS.

If you can accept that the A7r may indeed not have shutter shock effect, then you may like to ask; what, if anything, did Sony perform in the A7r design that prevents SS?

With respect I think that you are in denial - there is plenty of evidence that SS exist. Of course Sony could settle this issue once & for all by issuing a detailed denial with appropriate evidence but as usual they are keeping silent.

How can I be in denial about a camera which I don't own, and which I don't even like? No need for psychobabble here; we get enough of that from the trolls who visit. I'm just looking for the truth.

There are lots of people who believe there must be Shutter Shock in the A7 and will speak about it endlessly. But where did these rumors originate? One of the strongest proponents was once a respected reviewer, and now seems to be a shill for the M43 community.

If you have any SOLID evidence why don't you present it. Then we can discuss that.

 

[Stu 5]

Well I tend to agree about moving on but still I seen others not buy into this system due to the myth. It's sad a system can get a bad rap so quickly over nothing. If I was a Sony engineer I would be banging my head against the wall. Sure its more difficult to get sharp images but it has nothing to do with shutter shock. I think we have all become so spoiled to IS as other features we have forgotten how to take pictures. When you are dealing with a camera this small and put a big lens on it with no IS it takes a little work to get a crisp picture.

So how do you explain the same shutter shock when the camera is mounted onto a tripod, is that still just a myth?

I had the E-M5 and E-M1 and there is defiantly something going on with those. I have since left Olympus but is the IS not working or shutter shock I don't know but my personal keeper rate was around 75-80%. The Olympus system just doesn't suit me. How can one be 100% sure it's shutter shock or the IS failing? Without seeing inside the camera it's just a good guess.

I never intended to use the a7R for wildlife as I really think it's not made for that nor sports but I wanted to explore the shutter shock issue. Again mirrorless technology is still a long ways from the performance of a DSLR/SLT.

But I see no failures on the cameras part. When I miss focus it my fault and not a moving sensor or a slapping shutter. I think the myth is from the loud shutter sound.

www.gregmccary.com

 

[Nigel Wilkins]

I have been using the a7R, EA-LA4, 70-400mm combo and also the 70-300mm and I am getting really detailed and sharp images. The only thing is you have to go by the old rule when shooting with a zoom. Your shutter speed has to be as high as the focal length. Ect. at 300mm you need to be 1/300th or faster. This images are typical of what I am seeing.

I go back to what I said before if the sensor doesn't move like with the in body IS cameras it's just a matter of getting the camera steady and using a high enough shutter speed.

I sold my E-M1 because of the low amount of keepers I was getting. I can push the ISO so much higher on the a7R there is seldom need of IS.

And what if I want to shoot at 1/100 sec on a tripod for effect? For example, to get a helicopters rotors blurred while keeping the background & people sharp?

 

[captura]

Well I tend to agree about moving on but still I seen others not buy into this system due to the myth. It's sad a system can get a bad rap so quickly over nothing. If I was a Sony engineer I would be banging my head against the wall. Sure its more difficult to get sharp images but it has nothing to do with shutter shock. I think we have all become so spoiled to IS as other features we have forgotten how to take pictures. When you are dealing with a camera this small and put a big lens on it with no IS it takes a little work to get a crisp picture.

So how do you explain the same shutter shock when the camera is mounted onto a tripod, is that still just a myth?

The tripod effect has little do do with shutter shock. It has to do with IBIS, and the nedd to always shut of in-camera IBIS when using a tripod on Olympus cameras. This is extremely well documented on the M43. Forum, if you look through the archives you can find a lot of information there.

I had the E-M5 and E-M1 and there is defiantly something going on with those. I have since left Olympus but is the IS not working or shutter shock I don't know but my personal keeper rate was around 75-80%. The Olympus system just doesn't suit me. How can one be 100% sure it's shutter shock or the IS failing? Without seeing inside the camera it's just a good guess.

As I said, everyone knows to never use IBIS with a tripod on any Olympus camera.

I never intended to use the a7R for wildlife as I really think it's not made for that nor sports but I wanted to explore the shutter shock issue. Again mirrorless technology is still a long ways from the performance of a DSLR/SLT.

But I see no failures on the cameras part. When I miss focus it my fault and not a moving sensor or a slapping shutter. I think the myth is from the loud shutter sound.

www.gregmccary.com

 

[captura]

If shutter shock exists & I think that there is evidence that it does then it doesn't just affect longer telephoto lenses - it affects all lenses at certain shuter speeds , it's just that the movement affects longer lenses in a more easily seen manner.

I prefer to use low ISO's & often shoot images using the affected shutter speeds & this is a very real deterrent to me getting one of these cameras. The option of using higher ISO's in order to get higher shutter speeds does not seem am acceptable long-term solution to me. In the UK there is not blazing sunshine most of the time which forces us to use ND filters & the like to tame potential over -exposure :-D

The fact that it seems to cause problems with IS systems is a double blow as I personally like to use IS whenever possible. These issues suggest that Sony rushed these cameras to market without properly considering this issue , I just hope that there is a firmware solution to the problem but I fear that there may not be one ?

I have not seen a shred of evidence of shutter shock with the 7r. I've examined all the links including Digilloyd and it's all misinformation, far as I can see, shutter shock is present in my 2 M43 cameras. (E-PL1 and E-PM1.) Putting in the 1/8 sec. delay works. Sorry for introducing this here but to me it is relevant to my point.

But I believe that IS is a separate issue on those cameras. An early 2-dimensional in-camera IBIS system, I have seen it cause very similar vibrations all by itself, (and while the 1/8 sec. delay was ON, ensuring that this occurence was shutter-shock independent.)

Turning off IBIS enhanced the picture effect in the same way as invoking the 1/8 second delay. But I am satisfied that IS effect and shutter-shock are separate issues, on these Olympus cameras.

I cannot speak to a similar effect caused by in-lens IS systems like Sony's OSS.

If you can accept that the A7r may indeed not have shutter shock effect, then you may like to ask; what, if anything, did Sony perform in the A7r design that prevents SS?

With respect I think that you are in denial - there is plenty of evidence that SS exist. Of course Sony could settle this issue once & for all by issuing a detailed denial with appropriate evidence but as usual they are keeping silent.

How can I be in denial about a camera which I don't own, and which I don't even like? No need for psychobabble here; we get enough of that from the trolls who visit. I'm just looking for the truth.

There are lots of people who believe there must be Shutter Shock in the A7 and will speak about it endlessly. But where did these rumors originate? One of the strongest proponents was once a respected reviewer, and now seems to be a shill for the M43 community.

If you have any SOLID evidence why don't you present it. Then we can discuss that.

The solid evidence has been presented but you seem to just be sticking your head in the sand regarding it. One of the strongest proponents also does not like m43 yet he is also saying the A7r has shutter shock issues with certain lens combinations.

Stu I'vee liked most of your posts so. Far and the work and discussions you have presented. So let's just let this slide unil such time as you can put something that caan truly be cnsidered as solid 'evidence' on the table.

Thanks,

Steve

 

[captura]

I'm fairly surprised by the lack of more visible shake all round. It looks as if making three or four exposures with the shutter speed set slightly above the focal length rule (1/80th-1/100th here at 70mm) will in my case produce at least one clean result.

There shouldn't be any clean results if your alleged shutter shake is real. How do you explain a clean result with shutter shake? The earth moved just the right amount to counterbalance the camera shutter at the exact moment maybe?

If you have any experience of cameras in general - I have in all formats from subminiature to 10 x 8 including some of the worst shutter-mirror shake offenders ever made, like the Bronica C - you'll know that hand-held results always vary, and photographers for the last 130 years of instantaneous exposures have often taken several shots 'to be sure that one is sharp'. Of course, you can't be sure that one will be sharp. You can be unlucky or inexperienced and end up with every shot you take at 1/100th (or whatever) lacking sharpness. If you are aiming for very high standards, you may detect shake at faster speeds too.

This has been one of the great benefits of stabilisation. It hasn't just made hand-held 1/30th, 1/15th and so on possible - it's radically improved the outcome of exposures like 1/125th, 1/250th and even 1/500th. When the Dynax 7D appeared, I was able to interview the designers at photokina, and one of my questions was whether the AS was disabled at fast shutter speeds like 1/1000th. The answer was no - it worked all the way to 1/4000th, and it would improve many shots taken at faster speeds.

If I couldn't get clean results hand-held I would never have been able to make a living. In 35 years of film shooting I never had stabilisation and I'm sure I took more hand-held pictures than tripod shots.

No-one is using the term 'shutter shake' because it isn't - as with mirror action, it's a shock, a transmitted vibration. This can be absorbed, reflected, converted to sound (in fact a loud sound often means less energy is converted to movement - like the old Miranda Sensorex mirrors which fire with a hell of a clack, but you hardly feel the action). A mirror can be damped or braked, even the most basic thing like a foam pad, or the small spring-loaded baffle found in some Minolta models. This is maybe not an option for the shutter curtain.

It's not an 'alleged' shutter shock, it happens and you only need to own and use the camera to realise that. However it may be an 'alleged' range of outcomes, with some suggesting it's mission critical and others suggesting it really doesn'ty matter. Both may be right - one may be a professional wanting the 36 megapixel sensor for pure pixel level resolution on technical work, one may be a keen owner with less than 20/20 vision viewing the images on a Retina display.

David

Possibly when REAL SS occurs, it is a much-amplified effect caused by acoustical resonance. That should have been tuned out by thecamera maker on design and if it wasn't, then that is just sloppy work. Sony cameras have not experienced shutter shock since Sony put in a remedy that works, after the original NEX3 and NEX5 cameras.

 

[captura]

I'm fairly surprised by the lack of more visible shake all round. It looks as if making three or four exposures with the shutter speed set slightly above the focal length rule (1/80th-1/100th here at 70mm) will in my case produce at least one clean result.

There shouldn't be any clean results if your alleged shutter shake is real. How do you explain a clean result with shutter shake? The earth moved just the right amount to counterbalance the camera shutter at the exact moment maybe?

If you have any experience of cameras in general - I have in all formats from subminiature to 10 x 8 including some of the worst shutter-mirror shake offenders ever made, like the Bronica C - you'll know that hand-held results

Ok I had figured you at least used a tripod with those shots. If they were hand held they're utterly worthless for any kind of shake test, I can't imagine why you even bothered.

This issue has been tested to death with tripods. They offer repeatability and tend to show the shock quite consistently in specific shutter speed range, 1/100 +/- some depending on the lens over 100-150 mm, depending on lens weight/dimensions.

Handheld is equally interesting; there have been findings suggesting that heavy lens + handheld is not affected by the shock (LLoyd Chambers). Mushy human body is not that good at transferring vibration and heavy/sturdy lens propably absorb some. Then there is the question of whether or not IS is help or liability here (IMO it looks like it can be either as I'm getting good results with my 100/2.8L IS shooting shutter speeds in the middle of problem range.) and that obviously means handheld testing.

I have questioned Lloyd Cambers' work on his issue before. Formerly a respected researcher, he seems now to be part of a movement to demonstrate tthe Olympus E-M1's superiority over the Sony FF cameras. Be that as it may, these reports from Lloyd and Kirk on this issue is questionable to he extreme. Again, there is no solid evidence of SS with the A7r.

 

[captura]

SS is probably a myth with the A7r. No real evidence ever presented, just a lot of babble.

Lots of websites are showing a lot more than just babble.

SS certainly exists with the Olympus cameras...I prevent it on my 2 Olympus cameras by setting up for a 1/8 sec. delay. The improvement is noticeable.

Something which you cannot do on the Sony A7r yet, to be able to access if it makes any difference.

But ...still no evidence.

No can say there is no evidence as much as you want but it you choose to ignore what has been posted on websites or just do not have sufficient knowledge on the subject to understand the information that does not mean it does not exist. If people took notice of similar comments as yours on all the different websites, no camera brand would have ever had produced a camera that suffers from shutter shock. Quite often some of the people who claim that shutter shock does not exist also post photos that they say are pin sharp... unfortunately they are often not.

Common sense would dictate that if someone has a problem, the onus on them is to firstt provide evidence of the existence of a problem, so that others can judge.

Your endless repeating of what 'others' are saying about the allegeed problem with the A7r camera is only hearsaay, and not real evidence.

The onus is on you, good buddy.

 

[Horshack]

I understand needing different settings for different effects. But explain to me how a fixed sensor, made in to the PC board and fixed into the camera can move inside the camera?

For the same reason that solid earth can vibrate during an earthquake - vibration moves through the material itself. And with different materials inside the camera each will resonate at a different frequency.

Watch this:

 

[captura]

One comment on the 28-70. I've done some testing and at 28mm the edges are sharper f3.5 - 4.5 than at f8 - 11. OSS makes no real difference at f3.5, but does make it a bit less sharp at f8. That make be some of what you are seeing. Since I have an A7, not A7r I can't say about shutter shock at those lengths since I did not see any.

That's why I used it wide open at f/5.6 and 70mm. It's actually sharper wide open. However I've done other tests which show that if you turn OSS off, the overall performance of this lens improves, especially at 28mm.

David

I experienced the same thing with Olympus but the IS effectis separate from the shutter shock issue. The. Effect although similar in appearance (slight blurriess) is independent one from the other. Common sense dictates that IS (OSS) should be OFF when using a tripod, there is no need or it.

 

[captura]

I understand needing different settings for different effects. But explain to me how a fixed sensor, made in to the PC board and fixed into the camera can move inside the camera?

For the same reason that solid earth can vibrate during an earthquake - vibration moves through the material itself. And with different materials inside the camera each will resonate at a different frequency.

Watch this:

It's a synpathetic harmonic vibration effect which can be extremely destructive and self-perpetuating in the most extreme examples. Tesla proved that wit some of his experiments. Sny knows how to tune the effect out of it's cameras for the most part. EFCS in the A7 provides additional preventive support.

 

[tesilab]

ISO 50 and 8 sec exposure. I have no issues with tripod shots either. EA-LA-4 and 24-70mm. I got several exposures of this and everyone tack sharp.

You don't seem to be paying attention to the real issue. Your two proofs are totally beside the point for opposite reasons:

Both your fast and your exposures are completely outside the range where shutter shock occurs. It's a non-issue if it is fast enough, and for a slow enough exposure almost all the light recorded by the sensor is coming from after the camera has ceased vibrating from the shock.

Of course this issue doesn't affect everybody. If it did Sony would never have released it. The real question is whether some users, given the way they tend to use a camera are likely to affected by this issue, and the answer to that is yes. Some users will.

 

[captura]

I'm fairly surprised by the lack of more visible shake all round. It looks as if making three or four exposures with the shutter speed set slightly above the focal length rule (1/80th-1/100th here at 70mm) will in my case produce at least one clean result.

There shouldn't be any clean results if your alleged shutter shake is real. How do you explain a clean result with shutter shake? The earth moved just the right amount to counterbalance the camera shutter at the exact moment maybe?

If you have any experience of cameras in general - I have in all formats from subminiature to 10 x 8 including some of the worst shutter-mirror shake offenders ever made, like the Bronica C - you'll know that hand-held results

Ok I had figured you at least used a tripod with those shots. If they were hand held they're utterly worthless for any kind of shake test, I can't imagine why you even bothered.

This issue has been tested to death with tripods. They offer repeatability and tend to show the shock quite consistently in specific shutter speed range, 1/100 +/- some depending on the lens over 100-150 mm, depending on lens weight/dimensions.

Handheld is equally interesting; there have been findings suggesting that heavy lens + handheld is not affected by the shock (LLoyd Chambers). Mushy human body is not that good at transferring vibration and heavy/sturdy lens propably absorb some. Then there is the question of whether or not IS is help or liability here (IMO it looks like it can be either as I'm getting good results with my 100/2.8L IS shooting shutter speeds in the middle of problem range.) and that obviously means handheld testing.

I have questioned Lloyd Cambers' work on his issue before. Formerly a respected researcher, he seems now to be part of a movement to demonstrate tthe Olympus E-M1's superiority over the Sony FF cameras. Be that as it may, these reports from Lloyd and Kirk on this issue is questionable to he extreme. Again, there is no solid evidence of SS with the A7r.

Being a subscriber to LLoyds work I could not disagree more. He is pretty close to predicting m43 death and saying "why would one buy M1 when there is FF available with same price". Even his the latest blog post compares M1 to 1.4 liter car when FF is a big block V8. Lloyd is also the one who reported that there is no evidence of shutter shock with heavier MF lenses when shooting handheld. Lloyd may be many things but he is very far from a m43/M1 evangelist.

You were quicker with your reply than myself.

Lloyd critisizes anyone he sees reason to. Leica for software bugs/EVF quality etc., Nikon D800 for AF accuracy and lack of good live view for MF. Sony A7R for mechanical shutter/shock. And all this for a real reasons he demostrates well enough. Too many people want to shoot the messenger when they do not like the message.

Personally I have no reason make any judgement on this only based on 3rd party reports. I've tested this on weighted down tripod, central column down with tethering, even varying light to normalize ISO for different shutter speeds. Sony 55-210 is practically useless at 210 mm (with focus distance only 11 meters, distance makes things worse), all my other lenses at <= 100 mm seem fine enough, provided I stabilize the tripod well. Thus I have no reason to think other tele (and why not others like FE55, when bad things line up in worst case) lenses could not be affected.

Like said, I'm already optimizing my own method and adding workarounds for this as I know I'll be shooting other lenses too (a tele is coming, don't know which yet) and I want to be able to shoot as vibration free as possible in different conditions. I'm an A7R fan (love the camera, best thing since sliced bread), but I'm no fanboy who has to be in denial when I can see an issue with my own eyes. And I am hoping Sony would address the issue too. Just make it possible to have delay before shutter opens.

Lloyd appears with a new report and it sits there, under his main blog URL. Then it is replaced by a new one, still using the same main URL. But his older reports become unavailable; at least I couldn't find them. Fly-by-night journalism? In this manner one could become immune to criticism and answerable to no one. Who pays him?

I have doubts that M43 is going to disappear, for now. But as the whole camera market changes, there will be Canikons and maybe a few pretender Sonies...that is true. Maybe.