E-M1 new Electronic Shutter firmware 1.3?

[scott kirkpatrick]

I have been pixel peeping on my E-M1 and E-P5 using good long lenses and detailed scenes, sometimes with tripod, sometimes without, but at distances over 50 meters. Haven't seen the kind of blurring that shows up in the overheated air of DPReview. Since those examples seem to be mostly macro, I would wonder about AF and hand-holding problems confusing the issues. Read Roger Cicala's blog series on amateur lens-testing about a month ago. He plots the scatter of his automated MTF50 analysis for a Canon with telephoto when shot with contrast AF, with phase AF and with repeated manual focusing, camera on tripod, carefully aligned. Repeated MF gives a pretty tight set of results, contrast AF is next, phase AF, for all its speed, seems horrible.

I have installed firmware 1.3 on both M1 and P5 (yes, P5 got an update, and perhaps M5 as well), and will try them. I agree with Godfrey that Olympus Digital Camera app is far too scary.

scott

 

[Annna T]

I have been pixel peeping on my E-M1 and E-P5 using good long lenses and detailed scenes, sometimes with tripod, sometimes without, but at distances over 50 meters. Haven't seen the kind of blurring that shows up in the overheated air of DPReview. Since those examples seem to be mostly macro, I would wonder about AF and hand-holding problems confusing the issues. Read Roger Cicala's blog series on amateur lens-testing about a month ago. He plots the scatter of his automated MTF50 analysis for a Canon with telephoto when shot with contrast AF, with phase AF and with repeated manual focusing, camera on tripod, carefully aligned. Repeated MF gives a pretty tight set of results, contrast AF is next, phase AF, for all its speed, seems horrible.

I have installed firmware 1.3 on both M1 and P5 (yes, P5 got an update, and perhaps M5 as well), and will try them. I agree with Godfrey that Olympus Digital Camera app is far too scary.

scott

I own an E-M5 and definitely get shutter shock. Not all lenses behave in the same way. The most likely candidate is the wonderful 75mm which I have to shoot at 1/320 sec. at least to be sure that I'm not getting it. This occurs with IBIS on or off. Without IBIS, the 75mm should be ok starting at 1/150 sec. But with IBIS it should be ok three stops earlier at least, aka until 1/30 or 1/25. I have tested things intensively and my results got very blurry from 1/80 up to 1/125-1/180. Lower speeds were surprisingly better, but then my hands are not steady enough to get perfectly acceptable results, but someone with steady hands would get more keepers at 1/15 or 1/25 than at 1/80 or 1/100.

The first outing with that lens was dreadful.. Almost every shot had double edges and I was just shooting at buildings and front yard across the street, no macro.

My cure is to have a 1/8th sec. anti shock delay permanently on. Things get better, but not perfect, so the definitive cure when I really want a perfect shot is to avoid those speeds. A pity, since 1/100-1/200 are very useful speeds and should work with IBIS on.

I don't have problems with shorter focals, like the 12mm or the 25mm, nor with the new 12-40mm zoom. As for the 45mm, I think that I do rather have a bad copy than shutter shock. But it can exhibit the double edges too.

Now I think that there are quite a lot of sample variation between bodies; it may depends upon how internal screws are tightened or part are glued. Some get lucky, other less so. Combine that with a lot of different shooting styles (some tests seem to show that the problem is less if you hold the camera loosely). Of course if you see the problem you try holding the camera more firmly and may well end up just increasing the problem.

I do really hope that Olympus offer the same firmware update for the E-M5 since I don't plan to get an E-M1.

 

[Peter Klein]

Annna: I'm very happy to see Olympus fixing the shutter shock issue with an electronic shutter option, and I do hope it "trickles down" to the E-M5, too.

But... Someone I know who has connections with Olympus has said that they only licensed the electronic shutter for the E-M1 (someone else owns the patent). Along with the usual bromide about how they are in business to get you to buy new cameras, not to make your old one better. I hope he's wrong. Another friend uses the Panasonic GX7, and he really likes the electronic shutter. One caveat is that it can cause "stretching" of a fast-moving subject.

My experience with the E-M5 is similar to yours (though I don't have the 75). I just keep the 1/8 second delay on all the time. This of course limits its usefullness as a "decisive moment" camera--a lot can happen in 1/8 second when people or animals are involved. In low light I may turn the delay off as I'm shooting in the 1/15-1/60 range where the jitters don't happen.

I'm seriously thinking about shooting a film rangefinder again. No shutter shock there.

--Peter

 

[jonoslack]

Hi Godfrey,

The menu system on the camera now says:

"When shutter speed is 1/320 or less, the first shutter curtain is switched from mechanical to electronic to reduce blur caused by shutter impact."

Hi everyone
Everyone seems to be testing this at slow shutter speeds, but surely 1/320 or LESS means 1/500th, 1/1000th etc. NOT 1/4, 1/125, 1/250?............

...... Or am I being stupid?

 

[Godfrey]

Hi everyone
Everyone seems to be testing this at slow shutter speeds, but surely 1/320 or LESS means 1/500th, 1/1000th etc. NOT 1/4, 1/125, 1/250?............

...... Or am I being stupid?

This points out the age-old contradiction of terms ... as shutter speed goes up, exposure time goes down.

I'm sure that the issues being tested for are of decreasing importance at exposure times shorter than 1/320 sec. So testing at slower shutter speeds is the right thing to do.

]'-)

G

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

So the official instructions talk about reducing "shutter impact," and the complaints have been about blurring. That sounds like they meant to say "slower" shutter speeds. If the problem had been that undoing liveview caused some darkening of the part of the image first uncovered by the focal plane shutter, then you might want to test it at "faster" or "higher" shutter speeds. But I haven't seen the problem yet with 1.1 or 1.3 firmware, so I don't know how to test for it... I don't always assume that a memo in English from a foreign company means exactly what it says.

scott

 

[jonoslack]

This points out the age-old contradiction of terms ... as shutter speed goes up, exposure time goes down.

I'm sure that the issues being tested for are of decreasing importance at exposure times shorter than 1/320 sec. So testing at slower shutter speeds is the right thing to do.

]'-)

G

Well, if the shutter shock goes on for 1/1000 second then it will be more relevant in shorter exposures wouldn't you say? On the basis that it will represent the whole of a 1/1000 sec exposure, but only 1/10th of a 1/100 second exposure.

Of course I'm sure I'm wrong. Just saying, that's all!

 

[k-hawinkler]

Well, if the shutter shock goes on for 1/1000 second then it will be more relevant in shorter exposures wouldn't you say? On the basis that it will represent the whole of a 1/1000 sec exposure, but only 1/10th of a 1/100 second exposure.

Of course I'm sure I'm wrong. Just saying, that's all!

Didn't shutter shock mainly rear its ugly head for intermediate shutter speeds, say centered around 1/100 s, and long lenses? That's my recollection anyway.

Also, didn't someone indicate that the delay with the new firmware wasn't 0.0 s but was 0.02 s?

 

[jonoslack]

Didn't shutter shock mainly rear its ugly head for intermediate shutter speeds, say centered around 1/100 s, and long lenses? That's my recollection anyway.

Also, did not someone indicate that the delay with the new firmware wasn't 0 s but indeed was 0.02 s?

I think yor right, but you can see where I was coming from!
I'll install it later, although it doesn't seem as though it'll change my world!

 

[Godfrey]

Didn't shutter shock mainly rear its ugly head for intermediate shutter speeds, say centered around 1/100 s, and long lenses? That's my recollection anyway.

Also, did not someone indicate that the delay with the new firmware wasn't 0 s but indeed was 0.02 s?

According to another source, investigating some German photo forums, the delay is set to .03 seconds:

Here is how it works.
The setting of 0 sec. is in reality 0.03 sec. The sequence is thus: close-open-0.03sec delay-exposure-close-open. The sensor is blacked out just for the 0.03 second before the exposure begins. They found that the shutter shock vibrations took place within the first 0.03 sec, so with that minimal delay, the exposure doesn't begin until the vibration has stopped. It is not enough to be noticeable while shooting but enough to get around the problem. Very clever. That also explains why it sounds slightly different. There is just that added 3/100 between the two close-open sequences, so it sounds more like click-click---click-click rather than click-click-click-click.

The vibration inducing 'shock' is damped out after the first 3/100 sec, then the exposure is made for all shutter settings. For exposures under 1/320 sec, EFCS is also implemented.

I still haven't seen any evidence of this shutter-shock stuff in my photos.

G

 

[jonoslack]

I still haven't seen any evidence of this shutter-shock stuff in my photos.

G

Thanks for the clarification Godfrey.
I've not seen it any of my photos either. Rather the contrary I'd say.

 

[k-hawinkler]

According to another source, investigating some German photo forums, the delay is set to .03 seconds:


The vibration inducing 'shock' is damped out after the first 3/100 sec, then the exposure is made for all shutter settings. For exposures under 1/320 sec, EFCS is also implemented.

I still haven't seen any evidence of this shutter-shock stuff in my photos.

G

Many thanks for the correction, Godfrey. Thank you.

Jono, I actually may have confused the shutter shocks of the A7R and E-M1.
Reflecting on that I wonder whether Sony couldn't implement a similar solution?