Shutter Vibration

[Ron Pfister]

And I'm afraid your right regarding IBIS, Ashwin - unfortunately. That would be something *very* useful for me...

 

[ferrellmc]

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.

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

 

[Vivek]

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.

 

[algrove]

K-H
Just be careful pulling up the center of the tripod as it's like putting a pumpkin on a stick-hard to hold steady.

I have a similar RRS setup, but it has two wheels which hold the long lens out near its end and adjusts up or down. It's called the RRS lens support package CB-YS-QR. It sports a 10" rail.

 

[k-hawinkler]

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 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.

Then a 100% crop showing the focus area.

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.

 

[Knorp]

Trying my hand at the Leica R70-180 shooting my old radio unit.
Weighing a mere 2830 grams (incl battery grip and flash f20m) I needed my knee for elbow support after a while of shooting ...
Still, I think it's not bad hand-held at 1/160 and probably the mass absorbs the vibrations.

Flash, ISO400, F/4.0, 1/160, Ev -1 (distance ~2,5 mtr).

Note: for some odd reason my EXIF data doesn't show up anymore in my JPEGs since Maverick.
Someone has a clue what might be the cause or better still has the solution ?
TIA

 

[turtle]

I did my first bit of testing, mounting a 90 Elmarit-M on the A7R (Kipon adaptor) and using a QR plate on my venerable Velbon travel tripod. I shot frames from 2s up to 1/100 at a target with extremely crisp fine lettering detail. The target details (which someone more knowledgeable than me might be able to number crunch) were:

0.6mm letters
2.9m shooting distance.

There is vibration making itself visible and here is how I see it:

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 shoot longer than 50mm perhaps a couple of times a year, so the next test will be with the 50mm ZM planar.

That said, at 90mm, with the rig I have explained, it is not an issue worth worrying about. I probably would try to avoid speeds from faster than 1/10 and slower than 1/80 and this will be pretty simple, between ISO and and aperture changes. Hopefully, 50mm and below will not require any workarounds at any speeds so for me it will essentially be a dead issue.

If other people are saying that 1/50th is the worst speed then that squares with my results.

Will be interesting to see performance with the Zeiss 24-70 EF is like at the long end.

Its noteworthy that when I saw the first frames at 1/20th and 1/80th I thought they were pretty sharp. Its only when compared to the best frames that I thought 'hey, there is something here', shot a 1/50th frame and started looking harder.

Verdict? Not something to worry about with 90mm and below. I can see that with a 200mm lens, the danger zone might expand and be much more severe, however.

The bottom line is that this camera produces an astounding amount of detail and file quality that is way, way ahead of the double sized 5D III, but its only going to be visible in big prints (where huge dynamic range/shadow recovery is not needed).

I compared the 5D III with 24-70 II (at 35mm) against the A7R and CV 35 1.2 II, both at 2 seconds and f8 (ISO 100) and came to the conclusion, much like others, that only in prints in the 36" plus range is there likely to be a meaningful difference, where the a7R can continue to pull out real additional detail. Pixel level sharpness seemed to be comparable.

 

[Ron Pfister]

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

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...

Edit: please also note my comment about the Leica STA-1. It is a very un-Leica-like piece of kit made of plastic and therefore not nearly as stiff as it should be. Rainer Burzynski used to make a very nice collar, but it is currently out of production...

 

[Vivek]

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.

What are you trying to accomplish?! :shocked: Prove the camera is alright or put some testers out of business? :ROTFL:

 

[turtle]

50mm ZM planar tests completed. I used an outdoor scene with very fine detailed plants.

No difference at any speed.

... and wow, the 50 planar is all the lens a scenic shooter would ever need. So darned sharp with wonderful contrast. I will post elsewhere on the lens test results.

 

[Ron Pfister]

+1 on the ZM Planar - it is a very nice lens! And Merry Christmas!

 

[iiiNelson]

+2... And yet I still bought the 55/1.8. There's room for both as well as the 50 Lux.

 

[vjbelle]

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.

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.

Victor

 

[gurtch]

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

 

[k-hawinkler]

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

Many thanks Dave.
So, what to make of the various tests?

 

[Ron Pfister]

I think the gist is that everyone's setup is different, and thus the outcomes vary significantly.

 

[cunim]

If your technique is good, vibration is subtle. We are looking for something that is like the difference between a grade A lens and a grade B lens. Both can take great pictures and without careful comparison most people would not notice (or care about) the difference. Shoot. Enjoy.

Some of us are just not tuned that way. Why bother to lock up the mirror on your pro camera? Why care about getting a 36MP sensor? In some applications and to some people it matters.

Under controlled conditions I can detect vibration with the 90 cron in blind testing at 100% confidence. I have not bothered to do controlled testing with the 50R cron or FE55. Informally, I do see shutter vibration with both lenses.

I do not expect the A7r to match the my tech cameras. However, it can make me happy when everything is working well. I use care to avoid vibration, and select lenses that do not smear. Worth it for the moment but I wish I didn't have to be so careful. Simple is good.

In a year or so we will see pundits referring to the A7r as "innovative but flawed" and will all be looking forward to the next new thing.

 

[fmueller]

Mr. Chambers has a Christmas Eve message (tweet) for anybody that doesn't see it his way. I don't care if he's right, I would never send him a dime of money and I sorely regret having subscribed at one time.

https://twitter.com/diglloyd/status/415664751281057792

Lloyd Chambers (@diglloyd)
12/24/13, 9:06 PM
MORONS have their place in the world. sonyalpharumors.com/a7r-shutter-vi…

Download the official Twitter app here

 

[turtle]

Forgive me for being a bit slow, but what is Lloys C saying in his tweet? A7R buyers are morons, those who don't believe in shutter vibration are morons, or what?

 

[jlm]

looking at the responders to his tweet, they are all over the place in terms of rationality