Shutter Vibration

[Vivek]

There must be something wrong with his tripod and such. I bet that the results will be even better (even lower shutter speeds- all leaves will freeze to pose, charts will stay put) on the M10.

 

[Ron Pfister]

If you're referring to the M240, his findings were very similar to those with the A7R as far as Leica-R telephoto lenses are concerned. The tripod used is likely an RRS TVC-34 with an Arca Cube.

 

[Vivek]

If you're referring to the M240, his findings were very similar to those with the A7R as far as Leica-R telephoto lenses are concerned. The tripod used is likely an RRS TVC-34 with an Arca Cube.

I said that with tongue in cheek.

If this (re: M) is true then he has some serious problems with his gear or ascertaining something objectively. I have come across many many examples to be convinced that he is either not thorough or very biased. Either way, bad news if anyone follows this stuff verbatim.

 

[Ron Pfister]

Well, you certainly seem to have a very strong bias against him, dear Vivek. If you're not a subscriber, you're *really* not qualified to judge.

 

[Vivek]

Just step back and think about it for a second, Ron.

A7R clack-clack- no dispute.

A7 clack.

M (240) faint snick- barely audible and built solidly.

The title of this thread is "Shutter Vibration".

Makes sense?

 

[Ron Pfister]

No, not really. Objective analysis makes sense, but once again, let's leave it at that…

Edit: as a good friend of mine who lives not far from you likes to say: assumption is the mother of all f***-ups. Fundamentally true...

 

[vjbelle]

I have heard from Sony and they want sample files to send to engineering. This is at least a step forward.

Victor

 

[Ron Pfister]

I have heard from Sony and they want sample files to send to engineering. This is at least a step forward.

Fantastic! Thanks for making the effort! :thumbs:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I have heard from Sony and they want sample files to send to engineering. This is at least a step forward.

Victor

Good news Victor load them up.

 

[hcubell]

Good news Victor load them up.

You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.

 

[lambert]

You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.

I doubt that Sony engineers will engage in testing every lens in every mount. The expectations from many in the various forums seems to be that this $2000 Sony camera should be able to replace DSLRs, the very-expensive M240, even more expensive MF kit and then some.

I expect Sony would much prefer to see their native lens line succeed. So far, it seems the 35 and 55 are as good as it gets in the 35mm format.

And if they were to stumble across Lloyd Chamber's site they would feel very pleased with themselves to read comments like this:

"Now published in my review of the Sony FE 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar is a new Sony A7R ƒ/2.8 - ƒ/4 - ƒ/5.6 aperture series (Santa Claus Lights), which is mighty impressive. As in state of the art best available with any camera or lens at 35mm.

Which makes the Sony 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar ZA lens a steal at about $798.

Mated to the about $2298 Sony A7R, you get world-class rig for $2000 less than the cost of a Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux lens alone, and with superior results in several ways."

 

[Vivek]

You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.

That is a load of BS! :thumbdown:

 

[hcubell]

I doubt that Sony engineers will engage in testing every lens in every mount. The expectations from many in the various forums seems to be that this $2000 Sony camera should be able to replace DSLRs, the very-expensive M240, even more expensive MF kit and then some.

I expect Sony would much prefer to see their native lens line succeed. So far, it seems the 35 and 55 are as good as it gets in the 35mm format.

And if they were to stumble across Lloyd Chamber's site they would feel very pleased with themselves to read comments like this:

"Now published in my review of the Sony FE 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar is a new Sony A7R ƒ/2.8 - ƒ/4 - ƒ/5.6 aperture series (Santa Claus Lights), which is mighty impressive. As in state of the art best available with any camera or lens at 35mm.

Which makes the Sony 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar ZA lens a steal at about $798.

Mated to the about $2298 Sony A7R, you get world-class rig for $2000 less than the cost of a Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux lens alone, and with superior results in several ways."

You assumed, inaccurately, that I was pointing to the tests on Lloyd Chambers' site assessing the performance of the A7R with Leica M lenses. Not so. I should have been clearer. I was referring to the tests on the effects of shutter vibration with longer lenses. Yes, those tests were done with non-native FE lenses, but the effects should still be demonstrable with any long lens. The issue is whether a particular range of shutter speeds degrades sharpness compared to faster shutter speeds. You aren't testing absolute performance of the lens, just relative performance where only the shutter speed changes. There are some other anomalies that Chambers picked up with the 35mm FE lens that may be fixable in firmware or software.
I completely agree with you that it is not Sony's job to test the A7R with third party lenses. No other camera manufacturer's camera is judged on the basis of how it does with someone else's lenses. Why should the A7R? The A7R should be judged on the basis of how it does with the FE lenses compared to the Leica M with its lenses and the Nikon D800 with the best of the lenses available for it. It would be a big plus if the A7R also offers fantastic performance with a bunch of third party lenses with assorted and sundry adaptors, but that should not define the camera.

 

[Uaiomex]

I'll wait till Sony addresses this issue to work as good as in my Canon 6D and till Metabones releases an adapter with a rotating collar.
My money is waiting Sony and Metabones! Are you listening?
Eduardo

 

[vjbelle]

The issue is whether a particular range of shutter speeds degrades sharpness compared to faster shutter speeds. You aren't testing absolute performance of the lens, just relative performance where only the shutter speed changes.

Yes.... This has nothing to do with the type of lens only the focal length. This is a shutter vibration issue that manifests itself at certain shutter speeds. The vibration disappears with exposures 1s and longer and 1/250 and shorter at least with my 90mm. Much longer lenses may require shorter exposures.

Victor

 

[sergio lovisolo]

Shooting handheld, I don't have experience of shutter vibration. (must admit I have relatively steady hands, despite age, lol)
This example is 1/20 iso 2000 summicron m 50 f2, see movement on chin as he was probably speaking


_DSC0367 by sergio lovisolo, on Flickr

this one 1/50 with elmarit m 90


_DSC0434 by sergio lovisolo, on Flickr

both are crops, and sharpening has been added by flickr without request....

I tried to duplicate the vibration issue with my old but sturdy Fatif tripod, with the 90, but I have been unsuccessful to obtain it, so i think that probably the problem is related to the camera-tripod combination.

 

[Vivek]

Shooting handheld, I don't have experience of shutter vibration. (must admit I have relatively steady hands, despite age, lol)
This example is 1/20 iso 2000 summicron m 50 f2, see movement on chin as he was probably speaking


this one 1/50 with elmarit m 90



both are crops, and sharpening has been added by flickr without request....

I tried to duplicate the vibration issue with my old but sturdy Fatif tripod, with the 90, but I have been unsuccessful to obtain it, so i think that probably the problem is related to the camera-tripod combination.

Mr. Lovisolo, You and I need a subscription. That is the problem. :ROTFL:

 

[Ron Pfister]

It is very clear that the whole system influences the outcome. Very rigid and at the same time light weight is probably the worst combination.

Edit: as stated here http://www.getdpi.com/forum/555787-post52.html, I believe hand-holding goes a long way towards eliminating the problem. But this is simply not a solution for focal lengths of 135mm or longer or low-light situations, unless you don't care about reducing DR and general IQ by using very high ISO settings.

 

[ShooterSteve]

Yes...... I found out about the shutter shake with the DF very quickly. Couldn't use my 150 lens at all in the danger shutter speed zones and sent it back to Dave at CI. I don't use the DF at all... it sits on a shelf. I can use my Alpa on a flimsy Gitzo Traveler tripod and get tac sharp images at any shutter speed and/or focal length. There is nothing like a leaf shutter.

Victor

You can't compare a Compur or Copal shutter with any reflex or focal plane shutter camera. There is nothing better than a leaf shutter/view camera for slow shutter speeds. Never ever had a vibration problem with a view camera.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes leaf shutters this issue is just not relevant .The biggest issue with leaf shutters maybe a timing issue when its cold as they can slow down. But that would just be a exposure issue and a easy correction is right there to adjust.

What makes the tech cams such a nice solution is barely any lens distortion, amazing image quality and the ability for movements. Besides you won't find a higher resolving lens anywhere in photography. Cost will kill ya but for some folks it's what they need and buy. I love tech cams .