Ron Pfister
Member
And I'm afraid your right regarding IBIS, Ashwin - unfortunately. That would be something *very* useful for me...
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I think if you are going to do this properly you need to test the images against an image with no shutter vibration. As it is now, what are you comparing? One shutter speed to another with different ISO's. You have no benchmark to say, "look this is how good it can be with no shutter vibration and here is how it looks with shutter vibration."I've finally had time to test one of the lenses I was curious about:
Lens: Leica APO-Elmarit-R 1:2.8/180 with tripod collar STA-1
Aperture: f/4.0
Adapter: modified Voigtländer F Adapter (baffle removed, shimmed)
Shutter triggering method: 10s self-timer
Tripod: RRS TVC-33
Tripod head: Arca d4
Target: self-made, consisting of line grids (0.5 x 40mm lines) at varying orientations
Object distance: approx. 3.5m
Procedure: exposures from 1/800s to 1.6s at 1/3EV intervals
Results: pretty much terrible, but I suspected this going in (the combination of Arca d4 and Leica STA-1 is far from rock solid, in my experience with the D800E). The only usable exposures were 1/800s, 1/640s and 1/160s, and none of them were perfectly still. The rest showed varying degrees of blur. Below 50% crops of the 1/160s and 1/60s test images.
Looking at the different grids across all test images, the orientation of the vibration is not always the same, but the bottom left grid seems to generally fare pretty well (although the 1/60s sample below does not bear this out). I'll test this lens again when I get my variable ND filter, comparing against the D800. I want to be able to shoot all tests at ISO100 to avoid bias due to differing noise levels affecting sharpness.
K-H, I suggested something out of experience and not theorizing. At the very least get rid of the center column. The two tripod names (one of which I have been using for the past 10 years or so) I dropped use a bowl to hold a ball or a head.Thanks Vivek, I agree.
I have never used that tripod in the photo to take a picture with that setup.
That tripod was only holding the camera/lens so that I could take a picture of it.
The camera I took the photo with was sitting on a very sturdy Gitzo/RRS tripod/ball head.
The sturdy tripod was the one I used when taking shots of the kitchen scale.
The Gitzo Traveler you see in the photo is great though to shoot small cameras from.
But now you got my curiosity raised.
I think I will actually try the light tripod and see for myself how it does.
It might actually do well, as the heavy lens provides inertia and is supported right below its center of gravity.
As they say "Grau ist alle Theorie." Quote from von Goethe's Faust.
K-H, I suggested something out of experience and not theorizing. At the very least get rid of the center column. The two tripod names (one of which I have been using for the past 10 years or so) I dropped use a bowl to hold a ball or a head.
Ferell, it certainly is a factor, like it is with just about any other camera. The extent of which depends on the complete system (including what the tripod rests on). This was just a quick test series to see how this lens fares in general, and as I had mentioned at the end of my post, I am planning to repeat them more thoroughly once the variable ND filter I had ordered has arrived (it still hasn't :banghead. Then I will be able to do tests over a wide range of shutter speeds with all other factors remaining constant...I think if you are going to do this properly you need to test the images against an image with no shutter vibration. As it is now, what are you comparing? One shutter speed to another with different ISO's. You have no benchmark to say, "look this is how good it can be with no shutter vibration and here is how it looks with shutter vibration."
Go to part II of this page. I'm pretty convinced that shutter vibration is not a factor in the A7R. These studio tests compare an image with no shutter vibration with ones taken with shutter vibration at various shutter speeds.
Sony A7R vibration comparison with Nikon D3 and Sony NEX-7 » Before The Coffee
What are you trying to accomplish?! :shocked: Prove the camera is alright or put some testers out of business? :ROTFL:Thanks Vivek. I have that kind of sturdy gear as well.
So just out of curiosity, I fully extended the legs of the Gitzo Traveler but not its center column and shot the Sony A7R with Leica APO-Telyt-R 290/4 with it. Of course I set the rail such that the tripod supported precisely the center of mass of the camera, lens and supporting rail. BTW that alone weight a tad more than 6.25 pounds. However, the tripod itself weight a little less than 2.75 pounds. So total weight around 9 pounds, well within the Load Capacity of 15.43 lb (7 kg).
I shot a bunch of different exposure times and ISOs with 2 s delay. The tripod held the camera with lens in a very stable way. I could not detect any motion blur in any of the images. Here is a shot with ISO 400 and 1/50 s exposure time as some people claim that's in the midst of the problem zone.
First an OOC JPG, only reduced in size, shot wide open with a pretty thin DOF.
If this shows motion blur then I can happily live with that. Of course, outside this setup would be affected by wind and therefore less useful.
Your results are very consistent with mine. So, for now I use a 6 stop ND to get below 1s or shoot at up to ISO 800 to get to 1/250. I set my shutter speed to 1/250 in manual mode and auto ISO from 100 to 800. Works great. This is all for my Leica 90mm Summicron M. My Leica 50mm Summicron M shows no vibration. I am expecting a Zeiss 135 F2 which may be a little more challenging but I will post with the minimum speed needed to eliminate vibrations - maybe 1/320. Will see.2 seconds. Tack sharp
1/5 - essentially indistinguishable from 2s.
1/10 - as above. At 100%, really nit picking, you can just see a difference on screen, but this is never going to be relevant in print, unless someone has their nose up against a 74" print and is comparing to another 74" print and has very good eyes... and is obsessed... and the scene contains exceedingly fine high contrast detail... and any of this is visible in print.
1/20 - Can see a slight reduction in resolution. Will test to see how visible it is in prints. Completely invisible at 50% and so possibly visible in a 40" print, but I'd guess not.
1/50 - Can see a slight loss of resolution compared to slower speeds. I would want to avoid this speed range, but if I couldn't the shot would probably be comparable to a perfect 5D III shot printed to the same size.
1/80 - Sharper than 1/50. Close to 1/10. A touch better than 1/20th.
1/125 = perfect.
I don't know if this was posted yet....NO blurred images of shutter testing open shutter strobes in dark room vs normal exposure.
Sony A7R vibration comparison with Nikon D3 and Sony NEX-7 » Before The Coffee
Dave