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!

Phase Rolling Shutter Effect

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Wow, using the ES seems to be complicated especially with respect to the Dark Frame.
Perhaps another step when using it on a tech camera, as the back has no way to control light hitting the sensor so it tells the user when it needs the shutter closed or lens cap on. But it still avoids so many steps that it’s easier and very nice when the scene allows it. really isn’t complicated, the back tells you in needs to do a dark frame, so you click the shutter closed on the lens, touch the checkmark on the back, and then open the shutter again. A step, but not complicated or confusing.

Using it on the XF also has some advantages (as mentioned by Paul), and on that body camera handles the dark frame. I’ve been thinking of buying a used 300, which most of us have given up on because it is nearly impossible to get a sharp shot because of shutter vibration. I’ve heard the EFC has helped that, but now it seems very viable in some circumstances using ES.

- - - Updated - - -

As stated by Christopher. No problems so far with any natural subjects.

Clouds, water or leaves. Water is blurred anyway due to the shutter speed I tend to work with.

Paul C
Anyone tried it on a seascape with large portions of the scene covered by waves?
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Images of, say, 20-60 secs each for star trails would be interesting with ES. Depending on focal length and the angle of movement across the frame, could the star movement interact with the sweep of the sensor read-out?
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Ed,

The scan time will be around 0.6 seconds whatever the exposure time. So, if you expose for 20-40 seconds the back will do a sweeping reset that takes about 0.6, after that all of the sensor collects light, the electronic shutter is fully open. After 19-59 seconds a sweeping readout starts. So in essence that the ES will work just as a focal plane shutter.

With Electronic First Curtain there is a a second curtain that terminates exposure, that can sweep reasonably fast. Reset can be very fast. So it will still operate as an FP shutter, but sweep time will be decided by the travel time of the second curtain.

It is also possible to do a global reset. This is used on the Hasselblad X1D. The exposure starts with the leaf shutter open and the sensor just does a global reset. Exposure is terminated by the closure of the leaf shutter.

Reset is easy, it is just about connect the photodiode to signal ground. Readout is a different process. A reference voltage is ramped up and compared with photodiode voltage. The time to reach equal voltage is the digital output. This ramping is a bit slow and it is done for each row of the sensor. So momentous global readout cannot be made with the technology used now. It was possible on interline CCDs, that could pop the charge into a storage position and readout in post.

I am no expert in this area, it is just my understanding how those things work.

Best regards
Erik

Images of, say, 20-60 secs each for star trails would be interesting with ES. Depending on focal length and the angle of movement across the frame, could the star movement interact with the sweep of the sensor read-out?
 
Currently Sony's Exmor technology is up to the point where they can utilize BSI to push all on-sensor circuitry behind the photosensitive area, which means the wiring no longer occupies the same area as the sensor wells, allowing for larger pixels. But it may also mean that a global electronic shutter can now be implemented without significant drawbacks, as previously it came at the cost of reduced DR and higher noise. This is going to be the development to watch out for.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Yes that is correct, but wiring occupies a very small area on modern sensors anyway. Sony now also has stacked sensors but only in small sizes. The RX10 can do a lot of magic with new sensor technology.

Regarding global shutters, I guess it is something like 2-3 sensor generations ahead. I would suggest that things take time.

We had a fantastic journey with digital technology and it is not over yet, but things are slowing down a bit…

Best regards
Erik


Currently Sony's Exmor technology is up to the point where they can utilize BSI to push all on-sensor circuitry behind the photosensitive area, which means the wiring no longer occupies the same area as the sensor wells, allowing for larger pixels. But it may also mean that a global electronic shutter can now be implemented without significant drawbacks, as previously it came at the cost of reduced DR and higher noise. This is going to be the development to watch out for.
 

gebseng

Member
Simple example, of where I have immediately found 100% improvement. Phase/Schneider 240LS lens, an amazing piece of glass, but heavy and it has not tripod collar. With the XF, I was finding that even with a remote release, shutter speeds of 1/8 to 1/30 could possible contain blur, slight blur, but easily noticed especially on distant subject matter (1 mile to 6 miles out). I was able to get a better result by adding in the RRS large lens stabilization tool. But that device is both heavy, and takes time to setup. Plus, it totally limits me to a horizontal capture and many times I want to go vertical. XF and Vertical just don't mix well as you can visually see the camera move when the mirror goes up, so vibration is there (note I was always in the Vibration reduction mode on the XF). Just touching the back to fire the camera adds movement and I have had mixed results with the 2 sec delay.

Yesterday, I took the same setup out and shot at 1/15 to 1/30 with the ES, you will get a full shutter action on the first frame and after than all you hear is the beep. I did use the remote release. The images were tack sharp, none with the slight blur, none showed any rolling movement problems (subject matter was outdoors, trees, leaves plants). Personally I can't see any delay either between firing the normal shutter and using the ES, as 1/15 and 1/30 and 1/60 all seem to take the same amount of time. I understand that the ES is reading by lines thus slower capturing the data slower than if fired by focal, but I am not seeing any issues for my normal photography and the benefits for long glass are 100% improved.
Paul C
Hi Paul,

Is there an advantage of using the new ES in this setup, as opposed to the Electronic First Curtain?

best,

geb
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Hi Paul,

Is there an advantage of using the new ES in this setup, as opposed to the Electronic First Curtain?

best,

geb
Hi Geb,

I was impressed with the testing I did. Before ES, I pretty much had to limit my exposures with the 240LS to 1/45 or greater (on tripod), as the slower speeds, many times would show slight blur. If the camera was vertical (which I prefer many times) problems were worse. Use of the RRS long lens support fixed the problem most of the time, but that setup:

a: takes time to setup
b: won't easily allow for a vertical orientation of the camera

My use always had the Vibration Reduction ON, so I assume that the EFC was in effect, but personally I never really understood the EFC on the IQ100. On my K1 or D810, it's very clear when I am using the EFC as you can hear a difference, not with the XF and IQ100, at least for me.

Once I figured out ES on the XF, my first thoughts were just how it might improve the performance of the 240LS with the IQ100, and the results were impressive. 1/8 to 1/30 shutter speeds are now quite useable. I briefly tried the 300 Mamiya but gave up on it due to the same vibration issues, (but worse than the 240LS), but I figure that the ES would make use of the 300 possible, with slower shutter speeds, note I had to use 1/125 or higher with the 300, again on tripod.

I have also tried the older 210mm and 75-150 and both seem work very well with the ES.

I have to say again, the ES is a huge advantage for Phase One, for both long lens work and tech camera work.

Paul C
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
I wanted to find out if the ES would distort moving water, so I did a series of identical exposures using the FP shutter and then the ES. I did short exposures at high ISOs and long exposures with an ND filter, both in landscape and portrait orientation. (I didn't think the long exposures would show any difference but....)

Camera on firm tripod, VR turned on, triggered with my iPhone. As I suspected, there are no distinguishable differences in the files at all. Of course, I was using the SK55 mm which would not be prone to vibration like, say, the 240 mm, but that wasn't the purpose of my test. Tomorrow I'll "do" the 240 mm.

 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
A test of the ES versus the LS on the XF camera using the SK240 mm lens.

First shot to set the scene. Tripod, cube, 1/4 sec at f11, vibration delay, Capture Pilot.



Next is the LS shutter version at 100%



Next is the ES version.



It's hard to see the difference on a dumbed-down 1200 px jpg, but the resolution and micro contrast is very obvious in the RAW file. The ES is definitely worth using at slow shutter speeds. I also did a series at <100th/sec but could not see any difference.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Bill,

Thanks for sharing. On most natural subjects I would not expect a lot of distortion from the slow moving electronic shutter. Shoot some racing cars from tripod without panning and there will be some distortion…

Nice images, by the way!

Best regards
Erik

I wanted to find out if the ES would distort moving water, so I did a series of identical exposures using the FP shutter and then the ES. I did short exposures at high ISOs and long exposures with an ND filter, both in landscape and portrait orientation. (I didn't think the long exposures would show any difference but....)

Camera on firm tripod, VR turned on, triggered with my iPhone. As I suspected, there are no distinguishable differences in the files at all. Of course, I was using the SK55 mm which would not be prone to vibration like, say, the 240 mm, but that wasn't the purpose of my test. Tomorrow I'll "do" the 240 mm.

 

vjbelle

Well-known member
A test of the ES versus the LS on the XF camera using the SK240 mm lens.

First shot to set the scene. Tripod, cube, 1/4 sec at f11, vibration delay, Capture Pilot.



Next is the LS shutter version at 100%


Next is the ES version.



It's hard to see the difference on a dumbed-down 1200 px jpg, but the resolution and micro contrast is very obvious in the RAW file. The ES is definitely worth using at slow shutter speeds. I also did a series at <100th/sec but could not see any difference.
Bill...... I saw the difference immediately. To me, there's a big difference - but I'm a stickler on focus.

Victor
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
A test of the ES versus the LS on the XF camera using the SK240 mm lens.
<snip>

It's hard to see the difference on a dumbed-down 1200 px jpg, but the resolution and micro contrast is very obvious in the RAW file. The ES is definitely worth using at slow shutter speeds. I also did a series at <100th/sec but could not see any difference.
Thanks for taking the time to do this test and share it.

Impressive. Really obvious if you load the two JPEGs into a stack and then flip the second layer on and off.

Were these processed identically though? It's odd that the exposure on the leaves in the two images is practically identical, but on the moss/ferns there is a significant difference.

Kind regards,


Gerald.
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
They were processed identically, C1 defaults, but I had to alter the exposure very slightly on one of them to match the other. This, I suspect, is because the ES is more accurate than the LS.

Indeed, I saw this in many shots - though it is less evident when comparing the ES with FPS. As you know, LS effective speed is slightly affected by the aperture at which you're shooting. And probably very cold weather might slow the LS, too.
 
Top