Shutter Vibration

[ferrellmc]

If person A tests for shutter vibrations and gets good results and person B does the same test and gets poor results all indicators point to person B failing to control one or more variables.*Similarly, if I perform a lens sharpness test and I find exceptional sharpness and another person finds blur, it is not the lens optics (barring a defective lens)*but other variables.

I’ve shown in the iseismology tests that there is a great deal of activity prior to the onset of exposure in the A7R. Although this prelude may not have much to do with vibration at the sensor at the moment of exposure, it may however set the stage for vibration through the tripod/adapter/foot connections.

I think that the various test results by others are due to poor camera-tripod set up. The A7R has a unique characteristic, a 36mp sensor and a long shutter duration. This combination requires the utmost care in camera-tripod setup to minimize the effects of shutter vibration. This is primarily important with long lenses.

Sony A7R vibration comparison with Nikon D3 and Sony NEX-7 » Before The Coffee

 

[philber]

I did a second test, theoretically even more likely to show the dreaded shake. Mounted a heavy Leica R 35-70 f:3.5 on my A7R, and set it on wide angle, which pushes the lens away from the camera body. I mounted that on my flimsy, ultra-light, ultra-cheap Cullmann all-plastic tripod, fully deployed except for the centre column. Focus on a church, some 50m away. Still no shake. Call me a MORON!
Actually, I would like to apply to the Chambers' Club of Morons. I shall wear my membership with pride.
Again, it is impossible to prove that there is nothing there. But it does seem elusive indeed.

 

[k-hawinkler]

I did a second test, theoretically even more likely to show the dreaded shake. Mounted a heavy Leica R 35-70 f:3.5 on my A7R, and set it on wide angle, which pushes the lens away from the camera body. I mounted that on my flimsy, ultra-light, ultra-cheap Cullmann all-plastic tripod, fully deployed except for the centre column. Focus on a church, some 50m away. Still no shake. Call me a MORON!
Actually, I would like to apply to the Chambers' Club of Morons. I shall wear my membership with pride.
Again, it is impossible to prove that there is nothing there. But it does seem elusive indeed.

Did you shoot in portrait and compare to landscape orientation?

 

[philber]

Did you shoot in portrait and compare to landscape orientation?

No, I did not, K-H. Does it make a difference?

 

[Chuck Jones]

Joseph Holmes weighs in with an update on the shutter vibration problem, for those interested.

A7R Shutter Vibration - Problem Explained | The Camera Forum

 

[Ron Pfister]

Ron, yes I agree that it is a factor if you are referring to it's existence and if that existence exceeds our subjective standards. However, it is "not a factor" if the shutter vibration effect (blur) is on par with other cameras in the industry. We can't buy our way out of it so we live with it. Like the steering wheel in my car vibrates but it is expected and on par with other cars therefore it is not a factor in deciding if I will drive the car.

I'm looking forward to your tests once you have the ND filter.

Will do - still waiting for the darned filter. So far, shutter vibration has been an issue for me at certain shutter speeds with a number of lenses I've used on the A7R (e.g. Leica APO-Elmarit-R 2.8/180 with STA-1 tripod collar, Leica APO-Telyt-M 3.4/135 with Novoflex ASTAT-NEX collar), it is clearly more pronounced in portrait orientation, and subjectively comparing to my experience with the D800E, it is more severe (I am planning do side-by-side tests to shed more light on this, time permitting).

A quick comparison shooting the APO 180 hand-held actually showed better results at certain shutter speeds, which confirms me in my belief that the particular combination of gear used in the support setup (tripod, head, plates, collars, etc.) has a major influence on the outcome, as does the dampening provided by your body when shooting hand-held.

I generally agree with your statement regarding the severity of the issue vs. other systems, but I'd like to add that for me, the main system I'm comparing the A7R to is the NEX-7 because it is the light-weight system the A7R replaces for me in most situations. That camera has an even higher pixel density and the APS-C crop factor magnifies vibration blur compared to FF. Yet, it does feature an EFC, and it has been trouble free regarding shutter vibration in my experience. Karl-Heinz' tests with the APO 280 corroborate this.

As I've stated early on in this thread (or in another one on the subject - don't remember), what I'm primarily interested in is figuring out what works for me, considering the lenses and support components I have available, and I'm happy to share my results here, as they may help others. If other folks don't see the issue with their gear, all the better!

And perhaps there may even be major differences between individual A7R bodies. That's something I'm curious about, but certainly won't loose sleep over. Mine's definitely a keeper. It's a fabulous camera, and I'm in the process of finding work-arounds for the problems I've so far found in my use.

I believe it really is worth while to collect information on this issue in this thread, and I would also like to express my firm opinion that we can bury the debate regarding whether the issue exists or not. It does, and collecting detailed information about it from users with different support setups will likely help us figure out the dos and donts that may apply to this particular camera. Being neutral, objective and detailed in our reports (as many have been, perhaps you most of all) will certainly help, IMO.

 

[philber]

There is something mysterious here. The conditions that Joseph Holmes' shot shows are much less stringent (in theory) than the ones I put together, with a flimsy tripod and a very much more distant target. Yet he shows very nasty shake, and I don't.
What I can imagine is this, but this is pure conjecture: the A7R is light and rigid. This means that it tends to resonate (all materials resonate, it is a natural phenomenon) more than heavier, not-so-rigid cameras. Therefore, if the shutter happens to move at the resonant frequency of the camera-and-lens system, the intensity of the vibration will be greater than with another, less resonant system. Thus one can observe the phenomenon exhibited by Joseph Holmes' shot. That is the bad news. The good news is that this "only" happens on or very close to the camera's resonant frequency. This is why I and others totally fail to replicate the problem. This might explain why Sony could have missed the issue: after all, how often does one shoot a long lens mounted to a tripod via a lens collar, in portrait mode, around 1/100s?
But remember, this is pure speculation, trying to find a rational cause to apparently contradictory findings.

 

[Chuck Jones]

Ron, as I am understanding Joe Holmes, both of your lenses are falling right in that problem range. By any chance, are you shooting around 1/100th?

 

[Ron Pfister]

This might explain why Sony could have missed the issue: after all, how often does one shoot a long lens mounted to a tripod via a lens collar, in portrait mode, around 1/100s?
But remember, this is pure speculation, trying to find a rational cause to apparently contradictory findings.

Surprisingly often, if you're a nature or wildlife photographer. One may thus argue that the A7R is the wrong camera for this purpose, but that's not going to help us crack this nut.

I think you're on the right track with your thesis, Philippe. Without doing side-by-side comparisons, my subjective impression is that my flimsiest support setup has so far yielded the best results as far as shutter vibration is concerned. That likely won't be true for wind-induced vibration, so finding the right compromise will be the 'holy grail' for me.

 

[philber]

I believe it really is worth while to collect information on this issue in this thread, and I would also like to express my firm opinion that we can bury the debate regarding whether the issue exists or not. It does, and collecting detailed information about it from users with different support setups will likely help us figure out the dos and donts that may apply to this particular camera. Being neutral, objective and detailed in our reports (as many have been, perhaps you most of all) will certainly help, IMO.

Ron, I agree with everything you write. I would just like to add that information describing instances when the problem does not show up is just as relevant as the opposite IMHO. Only compiling "both sides of the fence", so to speak, will lead to understanding what may be happening and when. And maybe, just maybe, even why, and what can be done about it.

 

[Vivek]

Since this whole vibration business is not repeatable and not experienced by others, it is a conspiracy to drum up free advertisement for various blogs. To quote a well known person here, it is bullshit and nothing else.

Go make some pictures folks. Life is short to give in to this sort of false propaganda.

If things shkae, sharpen your technique instead of blaming it on the camera.

 

[Chuck Jones]

There is something mysterious here. The conditions that Joseph Holmes' shot shows are much less stringent (in theory) than the ones I put together, with a flimsy tripod and a very much more distant target. Yet he shows very nasty shake, and I don't.
What I can imagine is this, but this is pure conjecture: the A7R is light and rigid. This means that it tends to resonate (all materials resonate, it is a natural phenomenon) more than heavier, not-so-rigid cameras. Therefore, if the shutter happens to move at the resonant frequency of the camera-and-lens system, the intensity of the vibration will be greater than with another, less resonant system. Thus one can observe the phenomenon exhibited by Joseph Holmes' shot. That is the bad news. The good news is that this "only" happens on or very close to the camera's resonant frequency. This is why I and others totally fail to replicate the problem. This might explain why Sony could have missed the issue: after all, how often does one shoot a long lens mounted to a tripod via a lens collar, in portrait mode, around 1/100s?
But remember, this is pure speculation, trying to find a rational cause to apparently contradictory findings.

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes

The Sign of the Four, ch. 6 (1890)
Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four (Doubleday p. 111)

BINGO! You nailed it dude. Everything has a resonant frequency, and looks like for the A7R either the resonant frequency or one of its major harmonics is tuned about 100 hz. Joe adding his weight to the bottom of the camera is just "retuning" where that resonant frequency falls, in my opinion as well.

So, I guess the bottom line is if you shoot those long lenses, use 1/90th to 1/125th, look like this: :banghead: change your shutter speed and aperture combination to get yourself out of "The Vibration Zone" until Sony figures out how to correct the problem?

 

[Ron Pfister]

Ron, as I am understanding Joe Holmes, both of your lenses are falling right in that problem range. By any chance, are you shooting around 1/100th?

This is the range where I've seen problems, too. I'm trying to avoid it by shooting faster than 1/2f or slower than 2s, but I loathe sacrificing DR and IQ by using ISO-settings higher than 400. I'm hoping I'll gain the desired control regarding shutter speeds without sacrificing IQ once I have a variable ND-filter in hand...

 

[Chuck Jones]

Since this whole vibration business is not repeatable and not experienced by others, it is a conspiracy to drum up free advertisement for various blogs. To quote a well known person here, it is bullshit and nothing else.

Go make some pictures folks. Life is short to give in to this sort of false propaganda.

If things shkae, sharpen your technique instead of blaming it on the camera.

I certainly agree with the "Life is too short" and the "Go make some pictures" part of that Vivek, if not the rest This problem certainly is repeatable, just follow Joe's instructions. That said, I don't ever use over a 100mm lens, so I will never see this problem at all. Likely, neither will you

 

[Ron Pfister]

Ron, I agree with everything you write. I would just like to add that information describing instances when the problem does not show up is just as relevant as the opposite IMHO. Only compiling "both sides of the fence", so to speak, will lead to understanding what may be happening and when. And maybe, just maybe, even why, and what can be done about it.

I fully agree, Philippe. What I think is absolutely of no value is the kind of input Vivek has just provided. If you think the issue doesn't exist and it's all a hype, kindly keep out of the discussion. Those of us who have experienced it know it's real. If you want to contribute your findings in an objective and structured fashion (be they positive or negative), it will all help us complete the picture.

 

[philber]

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes

The Sign of the Four, ch. 6 (1890)
Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four (Doubleday p. 111)

BINGO! You nailed it dude. Everything has a resonant frequency, and looks like for the A7R either the resonant frequency or one of its major harmonics is tuned about 100 hz. Joe adding his weight to the bottom of the camera is just "retuning" where that resonant frequency falls, in my opinion as well.

So, I guess the bottom line is if you shoot those long lenses, use 1/90th to 1/125th, look like this: :bang head: change your shutter speed and aperture combination to get yourself out of "The Vibration Zone" until Sony figures out how to correct the problem?

Actually, any change to the system, made up of the camera, the adapter, the lens collar and the tripod, will retune the resonant behavior. Weight is an obvious such change, shutter speed in another, system geometry yet another. If this is "only" a resonant problem, non-onerous workarounds should be easy to put in place. But we are still in if-land for now...

 

[Ron Pfister]

Since this whole vibration business is not repeatable and not experienced by others, it is a conspiracy to drum up free advertisement for various blogs. To quote a well known person here, it is bullshit and nothing else.

Go make some pictures folks. Life is short to give in to this sort of false propaganda.

If things shkae, sharpen your technique instead of blaming it on the camera.

Vivek, we're not blaming anything or anyone. We're just trying to make this work. If you don't have the issue, be merry and shoot away...

 

[Vivek]

I certainly agree with the "Life is too short" and the "Go make some pictures" part of that Vivek, if not the rest This problem certainly is repeatable, just follow Joe's instructions. That said, I don't ever use over a 100mm lens, so I will never see this problem at all. Likely, neither will you

Chuck, i do not agree. Look at the posts/pics from Sergio. May be some of us should offer a hands on course on how to use the A7R? :ROTFL:

 

[Ron Pfister]

Chuck, i do not agree. Look at the posts/pics from Sergio. May be some of us should offer a hands on course on how to use the A7R? :ROTFL:

And carry a 7kg tripod into the field. Will you be my mule?

Edit: here the image of Sergio's tripod

 

[Vivek]

To save you some time, Mr. Pfister, you are on my ignore list.