The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Vibrations & the Contax 645

BradleyGibson

New member
In another thread I began discussing vibration and the Contax 645.

I've found that when shooting the 350/4, the Contax' shutter causes enough vibration to render the resulting image critically unsharp.

I've isolated the problem to shutter induced because I'm using mirror-lockup, which also stops down the lens and I'm using a remote electronic release. The system doesn't have any other moving parts. Technique-wise, I wait 6-10s after mirror up to fire, to ensure residual vibrations are damped. All controls on support, heads (if present) and collar are tight.

I have tried shooting both indoor and outdoor (in my home, a parking lot as well as in a large commercial building.) To completely eliminate the ground as a variable, I also shot on a vibration isolating Edmund Optics pneumatic table (isolates the shooting surface from building vibration) just to see if there was surprise variable involved here. No indications that the vibrations were coming from outside the camera/support system.

Next, I shot a number different tripods (my own 8-year-old Manfrotto carbon-fiber tripod, a giant Gitzo 5561SGT and a more practical Gitzo 2540. To eliminate variables, the lens' foot was screwed directly and tightly to the support. Shockingly (well, to me, anyway), using the above-mentioned technique, all the tripods gave roughly the same results, which showed significant vibration (resolving tree bark at ~60ft.)

When adding in my Acratech GV2 and leveling base I did find that the head did not change the performance, but the leveling base definitely worsened it. So my Acratech leveling base is now benched.

I tried sandbag weight on the camera itself, as well as strapped my 25+ backpack to the legs, the lens and the camera itself.

I was able to get good results OFTEN with the bag weighting the tripod (but not consistently), and not really much improvement with either the weights or my bag hanging from the lens or camera.

I have more testing to do to get consistent results, but that's where I'm at so far.

Any thoughts or input welcome. I'll post a 100% crop or two later today so you can all see what I'm talking about.

Best regards,
-Brad
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I owned the Contax 645 for several years and had an number of lenses (although not the 300 something) I never encountered any vibration problems.

I disliked several other thing on this camera, bit vibration was NEVER an issue for me in all shooting situations - also available light and long exposure times (1/30 - 1/8 sec).
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Thanks, Peter, that is good to know. As you'll be able to see from pictures I'll post, the image degradation is pretty dramatic.

I do have a backup camera, and will see if it vibrates to the same degree--up until now, I'd just assumed that they were all the same. Thanks for the heads-up! You know they say we should never assume... :)

Ok so here are a few choice samples from the testing I've done so far. I tend to like testing against tree bark, because it as "infinite detail", and, well, I'm a nature photographer :toocool:. None of these have been processed in any way (no sharpening, white balance is effectively random, and exposure has been chosen specifically to live at or around 1/15s (this is an area where it is particularly difficult to get sharp pictures), even if it means underexposing the subject (target aperture is f/8, but I've used from f/5.6 to f/11 for the tests). And, it probably goes without saying, I trust no one will be looking for artistic merit, as you'll be disappointed... :sleep006:

Sample #1
350/4 @ f/5.6 and 1/15s on Acratech GV2 + Acratech Leveling Base on Manfrotto 3444 Carbon Fiber Tripod; Bottom 2 legs extended. Mirror lockup 6+ second delay, remote trigger. No wind. Unweighted. Subject distance is ~12m.


Sample #1 - 100% crop


Sample #2
350/4 @ f/5.6 and 1/8s on Acratech GV2 + Acratech Leveling Base on Manfrotto 3444 Carbon Fiber Tripod; Bottom 2 legs extended. Mirror lockup 6+ second delay, remote trigger. No wind. Unweighted. Subject distance is ~10m.


Sample #2 - 100% Crop


Sample #3
350/4 @ f/11 and 1/15s with lens foot directly attached to Gitzo 5561SGT tripod (no tripod head); Bottom leg segment extended. Mirror lockup 6+ second delay, remote trigger. Very slight wind. Unweighted. Subjet distance is ~20m.


Sample #3 - 100% Crop
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Let we come to the conclusion that the system can't deliver a clear picture:
Sample #4
350/4 @ f5.6 and 1/2s on Acratech GV2 + Acratech Leveling Base on Manfrotto 3444 Carbon Fiber Tripod; Bottom 2 legs extended. Mirror lockup 6+ second delay, remote trigger. No wind. Weighted with ~10kg backpack strapped to tripod. Subject distance is ~10m.


Sample #4 - 100% Crop (it's still not biting crazy tack-sharp, but remember these are completely unsharpened. But my point is that I do not see vibration--any lack of bite may also be a focus error.)


I am surprised at how much the shutter vibration is blurring the picture. It's clear that I can improve things quite a bit when I weight the system, but even that doesn't deliver every time.

I'll be spending more time to suss this out, because the last thing anybody wants is to go through the trouble of climbing even a small mountain like this and come home only to discover that the pictures are blurry (thankfully, not the case here)...



Best regards,
-Brad
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
Interesting observations Bradley. I wonder if the issue is specific to your camera...I guess you may have to borrow a few to really know. OR organize a few people with your back/camera/lens/tripod combinations to test and see themselves.
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Yes, agreed. I do have a backup that I hadn't really thought to try until Peter's post above. If it performs similarly, I have a friend fairly nearby who also shoots Contax/P45+.

Perhaps he and I will have to get together to get to the bottom of this.

-Brad
 

PeterA

Well-known member
as an afterthought - Bradley - do you have a similar problem with other lenses?
I say this because the other day my FE 110/2 just fell apart ( literally)..it may be a lens issue..
 
D

ddk

Guest
I have the same problem with the 350/4 and my Contax bodies, it doesn't happen with any other lenses besides this one. I only bought mine few months ago and haven't spent any time trouble shooting it yet. I spent half with it realized that I don't have the right tools, technique, to use it, so it went back on the shelf till I get motivated to use it again. Thanks for posting, now I know what steps you've taken so I'll try other thing, but I did try the radio remote and weighing the tripod down but that didn't help.

One thing though, there's no way that I'm carrying this beast up any mountain or even a hill anytime soon, all the more power to you Bradley!
 

David K

Workshop Member
I'll test my Contax with the Hassy 350 SA as soon as I get a replacement 2CR5 battery for it (none to be found locally). I'm assuming that the lens has a tripod plate and that's how you're mounting it. I'll go out on a limb and say I'll be quite surprised if I don't get better results.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
maybe the tripod plate is not that great?

I think there are various Nikon Tele lenses where the tripod plate is the weak point.
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Thanks for all the help, guys!

DavidK and t_streng: One of the reasons I screwed the lens foot directly into the tripod for the parking lot test (Sample #3) was to eliminate the tripod plate and the tripod head as a variable. Still got bad pictures even with no tripod plate--I doubt it's the issue.

ddk: That is very interesting... It's very helpful to know that I'm not alone in my experiences... I too have not noticed vibration being an issue with any other lens. It may be an issue with the lens foot. I will (carefully) attempt to take pictures with the camera as the attach point to the tripod, to see if the 350/4's collar is, in fact the culprit. If it's not that, it's hard to see how the heaviest lens in the lineup would be the most susceptible to vibration! Thanks for this--it will help.

PeterA: I've also got the 35/3.5, 45/2.8, 80/2.0, 140/2.8 and 1.4x TC, and have not noticed this issue with any other lens. I look at most of my work at 1:1--certainly everything that I like, and have only observed this with the 350/4. After ddk's confirmation that he's seen similar behavior with his lens, I begin to suspect the 350/4's tripod collar may be the culprit. I have time today and will test this idea.

Best regards,
-Brad
 

carstenw

Active member
as an afterthought - Bradley - do you have a similar problem with other lenses?
I say this because the other day my FE 110/2 just fell apart ( literally)..it may be a lens issue..
Can you describe it closer, i.e. did parts start getting loose, or how did it progress, and which parts fell off? I have one of these and would like to know what to look for, in case it happens for me too.
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Update for those interested in this issue.

IMHO the Contax 645 and 350/4 suffer from a serious stability problem.

After a number of hours testing different ways to dial out the problem and checking the results, I can report I can now produce an image that borders on what I'd consider 'critically sharp'.

To do this, though, I loaded the tripod with various amounts of weight at various places (including suspended from the camera itself) to see what would have the greatest effect.

In the end, I created a harness to suspend 22kg (!) from the foot of the lens almost straight down, and an additional 6kg suspended from the camera.

Remember the camera, lens and back themselves weigh another 6kg, so the Manfrotto/Bogen 3444 tripod successfully supported a total of 34kg (75lbs for those in the US).

Anyway, with that ridiculous amount of weight, the image was crisping up.

All I have with me in the field will be my pack. So I plan to use it as ballast to weigh down the tripod to dampen vibrations. I'll need to find another solution to emulate the extra 6kg required to dampen the elasticity out of the Contax 645/Tele-ApoTessar combination.

At the moment, I'm thinking of something along the lines of this, except supporting the camera instead of the front of the lens.

I also took shots at high shutter speeds today to confirm that they also look very nice.

Sample #5: 1/15s, f/8, mirror lockup, 6+ second delay, remote trigger. No sharpening, bicubic downsampled. Subject distance ~20m.


Sample #5- 100% detail - Acceptably sharp - a small amount of vibration remains visible (to my eye, at least). No sharpening.


Other notes of interest:
* I tried my backup Contax 645 camera -- exactly the same behavior (lots of blur at moderately low shutter speeds).
* I tried clamping the camera to the tripod and allowing the lens to hang in free space (as one does with every other lens in the Contax lineup). This improved the blur significantly. Add weight to the tripod, and this may yield good results. I was not comfortable with the unbalance of that system, so I can't recommend this as a solution.

Any thoughts or suggestions on how to increase the rigidity of the camera and lens together (and remain field-portable)?

-Brad
 
Last edited:

stephengilbert

Active member
Brad,

Have you called RRS to see if they have a suggestion? Your idea about using their long lens kit to support the camera sounds like a good one, given that the camera is kind of hanging out there on the back of a giant lens. But maybe they've dealt with this before and could suggest some other solution.

It's almost like there's a flex on the camera/lens combination that needs elimination. You could always go with two tripods like LF shooters sometimes do when they're using a long lens/bellows. :)

Steve
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Brad,
You could always go with two tripods like LF shooters sometimes do when they're using a long lens/bellows. :)

Steve
Or even a tripod plus a monopod.

Brad, I appreciate you sharing your experiences on this. Earlier up this thread I was going to ask if you'd considered shoot with body and lens nestled in sandbags to see if it would avoid the flex. Thinking along the lines of what is sometimes used for long-range rifle shooting.

It sounds like you've narrowed things down nicely. Thanks again.
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Hey, guys, my pleasure.

I'm definitely going to think twice before hauling the big beast up a mountain, but eventually it will happen. And when it does, every gram of weight will count. Hopefully I can find a good stiff rail to solve my problems, because a second support (even my carbon fiber monopod) is just too much. In fact, last winter I went out and bought Gitzo's lightest weight CF tripod, because my current CF tripod is just too much weight. It's too flimsy for the weight I put on it, but it's better than nothing...



When you're up here, you're cursing the weight, but once you get back, you're so glad you brought the right gear for the job.

It's a love/hate kinda thing! :)

-Brad
 

PeterA

Well-known member
That last shot is a beauty Bradley.

Carsten - I shall report back on the FE in due course. It is currently with a repairer. Te hfirst symptom was a free wheeling focus ring...I took the lens in for repair and it was either going to need a tighetning of the focus ring - OR the whole assembly had somehow come out of its internal mounts.

I dont bang my gear around everythign I have ever bought is kept immaculate. The lens as all my lenses was sitting in its padded bag withing a padded cell in a padded camera bag - all very strange - but pretty much has convinced me to stop buying used gear from anyone except one or two people I have dealt with for years - and my local shop - where the fix would be handled no question asked.

Sadly this is not the first occurrence of paying top dollar for stuff that doesnt work, is broken or malfunctions from forums I have had now one too many lemons sold to me from OS - never gain I have no trust left. I have calculated that I hav espent over $3000 US over the last year - reparing stuff I bought from this forum....
 

BradleyGibson

New member
Thanks, Peter.

>I have had now one too many lemons sold to me from OS - never gain I have no trust left. I have calculated that I hav espent over $3000 US over the last year - reparing stuff I bought from this forum....

Nothing of mine, I hope?
 

Evanjoe610

New member
Bradley,

Have you ever tried the Gimbal tripod head? I remember from the PhotoPlus Expo, that many of the camera manufacturers used this tripod head to hold their LONG LENSES with the camera bodies attached. I'm not sure if this will help solve your problem, maybe worth a try?

Evan


Wimberley Gimbal Type Tripod Head II - with Arca Swiss-Type Quick Release Base (Requires Plate)
 
Top