Site Sponsors
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 351 to 400 of 433

Thread: Shutter Vibration

  1. #351
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Guy, Philippe,

    I believe the common theme with people who have had problems is the use of tripod collars (either the Novoflex ASTAT-NEX mounted to an adapter or lens-specific collars), thus leaving the camera relatively free to vibrate its own low mass because the only attachment point to the system is the lens mount surface which is perpendicular to the optical axis. I am thinking the key is to couple the camera body to the system via its tripod mount (i.e. parallel to the optical axis).
    I tested the nikon 70-200mm with it's collar. It's either the collar or the $80 adapter I'm using. I also made sure to tighten all connections securely. As shutter speeds are slowed from 1/160sec to 1/20sec shutter vibration increases.

    The novoflex you mention looks to be about 1/2" wide or less, the nikon's 70-200 is about 3/4" both are pretty narrow.

  2. #352
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,057
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Ron,

    Many thanks. You may have a point.
    However, I don't think there is anything wrong with the Novoflex ASTAT-NEX.
    It's very convenient to have to switch back and forth between landscape and portrait mode.

    But I agree with you what's needed is to couple the camera directly to the mass of the lens and support structure.
    The Novoflex ASTAT-NEX certainly does not facilitate that coupling.
    I'll work something out for my test configuration.
    K-H
    Do you use the R lens rotating feature? Seems that might be the easiest way to switch between landscape and portrait.

  3. #353
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    K-H
    Do you use the R lens rotating feature? Seems that might be the easiest way to switch between landscape and portrait.
    Yes, I do.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #354
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by ferrellmc View Post
    I tested the nikon 70-200mm with it's collar. It's either the collar or the $80 adapter I'm using. I also made sure to tighten all connections securely. As shutter speeds are slowed from 1/160sec to 1/20sec shutter vibration increases.

    The novoflex you mention looks to be about 1/2" wide or less, the nikon's 70-200 is about 3/4" both are pretty narrow.
    Yes, the Novoflex is a bit less than 1/2" wide, and too skinny for my liking. I would really like to see a Nikon F to E-mount adapter with an integrated collar that's almost as wide as the adapter itself. A very short foot akin to those of the collars integrated into the longer Leica-R teles would be ideal, IMO. If anyone cares to make one, I'll buy...

  5. #355
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    I did another test, still with Contax 180mm. I mounted it on my very large Gitzo tripod, which is fitted with Manfrotto 054 ball-head with Q5 quick-release. That is a much larger, heavier, more stable, more rigid setup than the two I used so far. The Q5 quick release has a much larger, rubber-covered, contact surface with the camera than the ones previously used. I duplicated my reference shot, and the result is ideed slightly sharper than with the flimsier setups. Because the tripods are on stable ground, and there is no wind, this cannot be due to the resistance of the system to external disturbance. So it must be that, the tighter the coupling of the camera to a large, stable mass, the greater the damping of the internal, shutter-induced vibration. The exact opposite of what the lens-collar-only setup achieves.
    As far as I am concerned, this last test satisfies me that I know what is happening, so I consider it closed to my satisfaction.
    Many thanks to all involved, who have put in time, effort, courtesy and talent towards this end!
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #356
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like
    With best regards, K-H.

  7. #357
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    [QUOTE=Ron Pfister;558409]OK, here some quick test results, and then off to bed...

    Lens: Leica APO-Elmarit-R 1:2.8/180
    Aperture: f/2.8
    Adapter: modified Voigtländer F Adapter (baffle removed, shimmed)
    Sensor orientation: landscape
    Shutter triggering method: 10s self-timer
    Tripod: RRS TVC-33
    Tripod head: Arca d4
    Attachment device:
    - Leica STA-1 tripod collar with RRS QR-Plate
    - Novoflex ASTAT-NEX tripod collar
    - flimsy and tiny no-name QR-plate directly on camera
    Target: self-made, consisting of line grids (0.5 x 40mm lines) at varying orientations
    Object distance: approx. 3.5m
    Procedure: 3 exposures at 1/50s and ISO 100 with each attachment device, best result selected (sample variation was found to be absolutely minimal), 100% crop presented

    Ron, could you describe your QR-plate - cork, rubber, aluminum, and size? Or maybe a pic of it? Thanks!

  8. #358
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    So I'm also evaluating the A7R. I've convinced myself that the A7R has slightly better low light autofocus compared to the A7. Now I'm trying to decide whether this is worth the extra 12 megapixels per file and the loss of efc. When all this talk about shutter shock started it worried me a bit. I compared some files and decided that for 35mm and 55mm focal lengths the files were fine for the A7R (although the A7 files may be sharper?). I don't do a lot of telephoto but I do like macro with a 200mm (Minolta 200 macro G). Since it has a collar and tripod foot I attached it to my tripod and hung the A7R off of it by the Sony LAEA3 adapter. I think they look sharp (pun intended). The last photo is a 200% crop from the photo right before it. Now I'm guessing that macro is just as finicky as long telephoto because the slightest vibration can set the whole setup vibrating. I see this whenever I make a manual focus change. I have to wait for the assembly to stop moving before setting off the shutter. I used the 10 second shutter delay. Interested in feedback on whether macro is equivalent to landscape with respect to sensitivity to shake.

    Regards,
    John









    Last edited by jfirneno; 1st January 2014 at 17:34. Reason: duped one photo so replaced it.

  9. #359
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    John, interesting series. What were your exposure conditions? If these were made under continuous light and with shutter in the 1/15 - 1/60 range I would expect to see shock - given the big heavy lens cantilevered out there and the high mag.

    I agree the 55 is not susceptible - a major plus for that lens. Glad to hear the 35 is also OK. It would be great if the mounting configuration you describe is immune as well. However, you report the A7 files are sharper - suggesting something evil is going on with the 7r images. They should be obviously sharper to a skilled observer.

    Back to looking for shock effects. If the system is well damped you might not notice any blur in a single exposure. Need to make some exposures at 1/60 and others at 1/2 sec holding everything constant (except illumination of course).

    Then compare crops at 200%. Best is to do it with you blind as to condition. Even blind you should be able to pick out the shock range at close to 100% accuracy. In fact, post a pair of unlabeled images so we can compare them. This is a subtle effect - unless you excite resonance in which case it is very obvious.

  10. #360
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    I must say I am a bit lost here. Cunim suggests "looking for shock effects". Is that what we should do? Not "seeing trouble", but actually "looking for it"? Here we have sharp shots, even viewed at 200%, which, combined with 36Mp and a high magnification factor, amounts to huge detail. Shouldn't we leave well enough alone? Aren't pictures more "proof of the pudding" than anything else?
    Because, if we loook closely enough (pun intended), we will find shake in every picture made with every camera, because there are parts that move, and all cameras thus shake. It is all a matter of proportion IMHO, whether the shake remains there but unseen, or whether it becomes obtrusive..

  11. #361
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by philber View Post
    I must say I am a bit lost here. Cunim suggests "looking for shock effects". Is that what we should do? Not "seeing trouble", but actually "looking for it"? Here we have sharp shots, even viewed at 200%, which, combined with 36Mp and a high magnification factor, amounts to huge detail. Shouldn't we leave well enough alone? Aren't pictures more "proof of the pudding" than anything else?
    Because, if we loook closely enough (pun intended), we will find shake in every picture made with every camera, because there are parts that move, and all cameras thus shake. It is all a matter of proportion IMHO, whether the shake remains there but unseen, or whether it becomes obtrusive..
    You broach an interesting subject here.

    "Flaw Finding" has become a cottage industry in photography. People gaining a reputation by way of "Wholesale Manipulation of Minutia" ... resulting in undermining confidence, and shifting attention away from any tool's ability to be a part of one's personal creative repertoire ... or not.

    Personally, I would not argue against in-depth revelations regarding technical matters as long as they at least have the appearance of being balanced reporting that takes into account the broad variety of actual applications the tool will see in the real world. I have that impression of how the Lens Rentals fellow goes about it. Not so much some others.

    I also think that many of us go in with magnified expectations (no pun intended), and then reality rears its ugly head and the whining starts. Jeeze, it is exhausting to just read all that could be wrong, let alone test for it yourself in the way you may make photographs ...

    Actually not "the way you may make photographs" because all you start looking for are the flaws, whether meaningful to your work or not ... which I think is what you are alluding to.

    Frankly, the "Flaw Finding" cacophony has become deafening. The arguments rage with disagreement and brow beating until one can lose sight of one's own photographic experiences, objectives and intent, and assume those of others.

    Are we losing our own instincts and subjective creative judgements to a "collective" one?

    I most certainly am not immune to this growing trend. I usually evaluate images as a whole ... given worthy content, what is my over-all impression of the image? What presence does it have? How does it present as a print? That the eyeball of a person in the background is retina slicing sharp at 200% on screen is waaaaay secondary to that ... but in the new world order it can be deemed unacceptable because it should have been sharp at any size even if it will NEVER be printed large enough to matter.

    I start questioning my own years of experience in printing from a broad variety of digital cameras of various sensor sizes and meg count. Some chart says there isn't that much difference between 24 meg and 36 meg, and all that experience to the contrary should go out the window?

    Someone puts some super tele with 1.4X and a questionable adapter on a specific support system and declares shutter vibration the culprit for fuzzy details, and I think back to personally NEVER being able to successfully do that with any camera, let alone one the size of P&S with 36 meg. Not that some can't pull it off, but there are so many variables it boggles the mind to figure it all out.

    Anyway ... right, wrong, or indifferent ... thanks for the thought provoking post!

    - Marc
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #362
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    This is getting way too philosophical for me.
    I was minding my own business trying out my lenses when bam I ran smack into the shutter shake problem with a tele lens in portrait mode.
    So what to do? Ignoring the problem doesn't help to improve the situation.
    In the spirit of knowing your tools, their capabilities and limitations, I looked a bit into the issue.
    Conclusion for my two lenses in question, avoid portrait mode for the time being, and use landscape mode with some stabilizing add ons.
    Move on to the next set of lenses and find out which work well with the A7R and which don't.
    Have fun with photography.
    That's about it.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #363
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    I think it's important, especially when new, to test the bleep out of our equipment so that we learn how they react to certain situations and where the problems are. We can then evaluate how best to use them and whether they fit our needs. This is especially important with what is to all intents and purposes a new type of camera.

    I came up with a long list of issues and problems with my Sony by throwing it hard at the type of shooting I know best. Wedding photography. Albeit my sisters wedding and I was just messing around. It was there I learnt of the shutter lag, solution, learning to time better, react better and I bought a rubber button to put on the shutter release so that I can find it 'blind' more easily. Nevermind a bunch of settings which also slightly reduce the lag. I took it out on a landscape shoot, dawn in the rain. There I learnt that I preferred the focus zoom thingy on the big button in the middle of the wheel so I can find it easier and I programmed the right hand press of the wheel to also do focus zoom cause I kept hitting it by mistake while trying to find the big button. I've turned the wheel off altogether because I found it too sensitive, kept changing image when trying to navigate around an image during review. I've learnt that peaking is something that needs to be learnt and f1.4 on low contrast lenses does not give accurate peaking. I've learnt that you need good, very good adaptors if you don't want built in tilt or swing. I know without a shadow of a doubt that the camera would not work for me if I was still shooting events due to its quirks but it's an incredible and fun pleasure to use for my 'retirement' from event photography.

    Is the shutter issue real. I'm sure it is. Does it matter? That's a subjective matter. My longest focal length that I use is 85mm. Just scored a great Pentax M/85 f2 on ebay yesterday for $180. I don't think then that it will ever be an issue for my personal needs. Just as the shutter lag isn't an issue for a landscape photographer , etc, etc. We need to know what a camera is good for to know whether it suits us. What Marc points out is important. I see it as instead of these things being looked at objectively, in the forums (though rarely this one) it becomes a fanboy vs basher affair. People looking to be negative or positive without allowing for personal needs and preferences. It's just a tool. It either works for us or it doesn't. We either find workarounds to our issues or we move on to another tool.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #364
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by ferrellmc View Post
    Ron, could you describe your QR-plate - cork, rubber, aluminum, and size? Or maybe a pic of it? Thanks!
    Sure. It's made of aluminum and features rubber strips that are let into the mounting surface. Here a link to the product:

    Universal Quick Release QR Plate for NEX3 NEX5 NEX6 NEX7 RX100 Arca Compatible | eBay

  15. #365
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by philber View Post
    I must say I am a bit lost here. Cunim suggests "looking for shock effects". Is that what we should do? Not "seeing trouble", but actually "looking for it"? Here we have sharp shots, even viewed at 200%, which, combined with 36Mp and a high magnification factor, amounts to huge detail. Shouldn't we leave well enough alone? Aren't pictures more "proof of the pudding" than anything else?
    Because, if we loook closely enough (pun intended), we will find shake in every picture made with every camera, because there are parts that move, and all cameras thus shake. It is all a matter of proportion IMHO, whether the shake remains there but unseen, or whether it becomes obtrusive..
    Philippe, I definitely see your point of view, and I agree with it in general. In contrast to this, the alternate point of view is that shutter (or any other kind of) vibration blur very quickly negates the advantage of 36 over 24MP, no OLPF vs. OLPF, or a very expensive piece of glass compared to something much less sophisticated. Should we not try to maximize the capabilities of our gear, or at least learn how to do so? Once we know how, we can then choose on a case-by-case basis whether we want to (or will be able to) go all the way or not.

    Like Ben, I firmly believe it is definitely worth my while to thoroughly test new gear to identify its strengths and weaknesses, and how some of the weaknesses can possibly be worked around. How far anyone wants to go down that road (if at all) is of course a highly individual decision. I personally enjoy both aspects of photography (i.e. the creative, intuitive as well as the technical) immensely, and for me, they go hand-in-hand. That's why I don't mind doing this kind of testing, even if it takes a while to find the right solution or to come to the conclusion that certain camera/lens combinations may not be 'worth the trouble', so to speak.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #366
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Can't say I enjoy testing at all, it's a necessary evil. Once it's out the way then hopefully I can set about allowing the camera to become an extension of my mind. That's the idea at any rate. I get really frustrated going through the testing time, especially when it takes often years to get a problem worked out. It took a couple of years to get all the AF niggles sorted out on my 5D's before it was working properly and I could just allow it to to what I'm telling it to do. Far more frustrating though as a pro, tools have to work or you don't eat. Now with this camera I have the luxury to take my time.
    Last edited by Ben Rubinstein; 2nd January 2014 at 05:28.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #367
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    This is getting way too philosophical for me.
    I was minding my own business trying out my lenses when bam I ran smack into the shutter shake problem with a tele lens in portrait mode.
    So what to do? Ignoring the problem doesn't help to improve the situation.
    In the spirit of knowing your tools, their capabilities and limitations, I looked a bit into the issue.
    Conclusion for my two lenses in question, avoid portrait mode for the time being, and use landscape mode with some stabilizing add ons.
    Move on to the next set of lenses and find out which work well with the A7R and which don't.
    Have fun with photography.
    That's about it.
    Too philosophical? Probably.

    Conversely, I'm reading posts under the title "Shutter Vibration" that say this or that didn't work with no further information so we can all learn what works.

    You ran into shutter vibration shooting in portrait orientation. Got it. In fact, far more "real world" relevant than shooting eye busting test charts IMHO.

    However ...

    What two lenses? What adapter? Tripod, monopod and what head? Or handheld? What shutter speed? Any pics to show?

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #368
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    What two lenses? What adapter? Tripod, monopod and what head? Or handheld? What shutter speed? Any pics to show?
    Karl-Heinz has documented all his tests in detail in the thread below, and has linked to it several times from this thread here. Well done, IMO.

    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/494...m-keeping.html
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #369
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Here's my short report on shutter shock...
    The significance of my findings may be limited since I only have a 50mm lens for the time being (Zeiss ZM 2.0/50 adapted through a Novoflex NEX/LEM).

    However ... this is what I found:

    The camera plate temporarily mounted on my A7R is a Novoflex QPL-1 (without rubber). Head is an Arca D4. Tripods tested are a large Berlebach Report with single extension and center column (not extended), a mid sized Berlebach Report with 2 extensions and a flat mounting head and finally a small FLM Carbon with 3 extensions and center column (not extended). Everything carefully tightened and locked down.
    I cannot detect any signs of shutter vibration when using one of these kits at any shutter speed in near distance or at infinity in landscape or portrait orientation (again: with a small, light 50mm lens)

    For testing purposes I've also mounted a very old Linhof ballhead on the mid sized wood tripod and damped all connections with rubber (cork respectively). I did not tighten the screws very strong. With this kit I do see shutter vibration in the range of 1/125'' to 1/30'' (didn't test longer shutter sppeds).

    Shooting handheld 1/500'' is super... at 1/250'' motion blur starts to show up. 1/250'' off a monopod (Monostat RS16-Pro-Art) is sharp. 1/125'' is critical.

    Reminds me very much of how my MFDBs act on my Contax.
    Last edited by thomas; 2nd January 2014 at 06:46.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #370
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Hi Marc
    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I start questioning my own years of experience in printing from a broad variety of digital cameras of various sensor sizes and meg count. Some chart says there isn't that much difference between 24 meg and 36 meg, and all that experience to the contrary should go out the window?

    - Marc
    Hmm - the chart didn't say anything (it must have been your interpretation). It was there to point out that when talking of pixel count (area) vs Print Size (linear) one shouldn't get confused into thinking they're the same thing. Just That. . . . then it went off into a long discussion about printing (shrug).

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Too philosophical? Probably.

    Conversely, I'm reading posts under the title "Shutter Vibration" that say this or that didn't work with no further information so we can all learn what works.

    You ran into shutter vibration shooting in portrait orientation. Got it. In fact, far more "real world" relevant than shooting eye busting test charts IMHO.

    However ...

    What two lenses? What adapter? Tripod, monopod and what head? Or handheld? What shutter speed? Any pics to show?

    - Marc
    Hi Marc
    K-H has posted loads of examples and pictures of cameras and setups in this thread - exhaustive I'd say. Work done for you!

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #371
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Philber and Marc voice subjective opinions and raise an ancient and enjoyable topic. However, a thread devoted to a technical subject (shutter vibration) is probably not the best place to go down that path. Better we stick to the conditions that lead to shutter vibration being present, so that we can learn how to minimize it. I have found the information here to be very useful.

    Thomas' post provides another indication that lightweight normal lenses are not sensitive to the A7r shutter, unless you allow resonance to be excited.

    Thomas, do you think the handheld motion blur is a property of the shutter or of your hand? I can't hand hold my Alpa / Rodie 40mm (leaf shutter) at anything below about 1/100, without getting motion blur. I am amazed at how well some of the people here manage that skill.

    John's post about macro could be useful, if he were to provide his imaging parameters.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #372
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    Thomas, do you think the handheld motion blur is a property of the shutter or of your hand?
    hard to tell. The blur at 1/125'' (Monopod) 1/250'' respectively (handheld) looks whirring. This is why I would say there is some "shock" (shutter shock).
    I also think the movement of a human body could be freezed at 1/125'' since it's a rather smooth movement. Body movement may introduce some smooth softness... but not the kind of whirring blur I do see (unless you suffer from some kind of muscle cramps). I could be totally wrong, of course!

  23. #373
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    John, interesting series. What were your exposure conditions? If these were made under continuous light and with shutter in the 1/15 - 1/60 range I would expect to see shock - given the big heavy lens cantilevered out there and the high mag.

    I agree the 55 is not susceptible - a major plus for that lens. Glad to hear the 35 is also OK. It would be great if the mounting configuration you describe is immune as well. However, you report the A7 files are sharper - suggesting something evil is going on with the 7r images. They should be obviously sharper to a skilled observer.

    Back to looking for shock effects. If the system is well damped you might not notice any blur in a single exposure. Need to make some exposures at 1/60 and others at 1/2 sec holding everything constant (except illumination of course).

    Then compare crops at 200%. Best is to do it with you blind as to condition. Even blind you should be able to pick out the shock range at close to 100% accuracy. In fact, post a pair of unlabeled images so we can compare them. This is a subtle effect - unless you excite resonance in which case it is very obvious.
    Cunim:

    These shots were done in sunlight through a window. The exposure time varied. My comment about A7 files being sharper is a little hyper. What I noticed in a comparison between A7 and A7R shots in similar circumstances (good outdoor light) was that the A7R were sharp up to 200% zoom and the A7 were sharp up to 400% zoom. Neither would be considered unsharp. Just that the A7 was really sharp. Maybe that's efc giving extra sharpness. If you want to look at the raw files of the shots I put up here send me a message with an e-mail and I'll give you a link to a drop box folder.

    Regards,
    John

  24. #374
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    K-H, I am sorry if you took my post as critical of you and your role in this thread. That was the opposite of my intent, and, when I thanked all who had contributed, you were clearly in my mind among those.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #375
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    at what % does zooming stop making sense?

    i would assume 100% is the limit, beyond which you are looking at interpolated data?

  26. #376
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    at what % does zooming stop making sense?

    i would assume 100% is the limit, beyond which you are looking at interpolated data?
    That's a good question. It does seem we've been going a bit overboard.

    Regards,
    John

  27. #377
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    at what % does zooming stop making sense?

    i would assume 100% is the limit, beyond which you are looking at interpolated data?
    That's a very good point. Far as I know any non-fractional zoom (100%, 200%, etc) should not create interpolation artifacts but that is speculation on my part because I don't know how simple zooms are implemented in C1 or LR. What I do know is that just blowing up the size makes the effect much easier to see.

    Too bad we have to look for this in real images. That is just tedious. An engineer could measure PSFs and thus circle of confusion data with and without shutter shock. The amount of COC spread would be a simple numerical thing. I wonder if anyone here has a contact on the engineering end of Sony or Zeiss - and could request COCs just the way we get MTFs. In particular I would like to know what adapters do. There is lots of speculation out there but little in the way of actual data.

    At any rate, I am a fairly happy camper at this point and will stop futzing about with tests. The 55 is a very nice lens. Horay! I cannot make it show vibration at 1/30 or 1/60 so it is even quite forgiving. That lens covers 75% of my needs. The 100 apo 'cron asph I just love for the other 25%, and the contributors here have taught me how to avoid the worst shock blur with that lens. Thanks GetDPI.

    To summarize, the A7r works for me for casual shooting. First time a small format camera has done that.

    I remain with MF and LF for the studio work that is my primary hobby. No valuation of the Sony implied. I just like the slow and contemplative type of imaging, and the results it produces.

    Peter
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #378
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by philber View Post
    K-H, I am sorry if you took my post as critical of you and your role in this thread. That was the opposite of my intent, and, when I thanked all who had contributed, you were clearly in my mind among those.

    Oh no, I hadn't noticed any criticisms of you about me.
    In fact I thrive on honest but constructive criticism.
    I welcome it. Thanks.
    Don't worry, I really appreciate your contributions and feedback.
    Because of the many contributions in this thread I think that those folks who paid attention to them should now have a better appreciation of the issue at hand. I would like to thank all the contributors. Thank you indeed!
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #379
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Marc


    Hmm - the chart didn't say anything (it must have been your interpretation). It was there to point out that when talking of pixel count (area) vs Print Size (linear) one shouldn't get confused into thinking they're the same thing. Just That. . . . then it went off into a long discussion about printing (shrug).


    Hi Marc
    K-H has posted loads of examples and pictures of cameras and setups in this thread - exhaustive I'd say. Work done for you!
    Prints: Understood. Thanks.

    I knew about the previous K-H posts ... but it was specifically the one he just did and found an issue ... so I still do not know what and how he was shooting in that instance ... which would have been helpful.

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  30. #380
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Prints: Understood. Thanks.

    I knew about the previous K-H posts ... but it was specifically the one he just did and found an issue ... so I still do not know what and how he was shooting in that instance ... which would have been helpful.

    - Marc

    Marc,

    Thanks, I try to be pretty complete in my documentation and leave the Exif in the images. I would be happy to answer questions you might have.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #381
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    K-H, the post I was referencing was where you said this:

    "I was minding my own business trying out my lenses when bam I ran smack into the shutter shake problem with a tele lens in portrait mode.
    So what to do? Ignoring the problem doesn't help to improve the situation.
    In the spirit of knowing your tools, their capabilities and limitations, I looked a bit into the issue.
    Conclusion for my two lenses in question, avoid portrait mode for the time being, and use landscape mode with some stabilizing add ons."


    I do not know how that relates to what you may have posted prior ... which two lenses? Adapters? Support? What shutter speed? etc. I don't know all of your gear, or if these two lenses were different from the others you spoke of.

    Actually, I wish folks posting in the "Fun With" thread would mention more about the details ... "A7R 24-70" ... which 24-70? What shutter speed?

    So far, it seems the Sony native lenses do well, and I have found the Sony ZA lenses also do well using the Sony LA-EA4 adapter (and focus faster than the FEs) ... so I am leery of adding any non-Sony lenses+adapter for this camera ... other than the few M lenses I already have that seem okay.

    Thanks for all the info ...

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #382
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    K-H, the post I was referencing was where you said this:

    "I was minding my own business trying out my lenses when bam I ran smack into the shutter shake problem with a tele lens in portrait mode.
    So what to do? Ignoring the problem doesn't help to improve the situation.
    In the spirit of knowing your tools, their capabilities and limitations, I looked a bit into the issue.
    Conclusion for my two lenses in question, avoid portrait mode for the time being, and use landscape mode with some stabilizing add ons."


    I do not know how that relates to what you may have posted prior ... which two lenses? Adapters? Support? What shutter speed? etc. I don't know all of your gear, or if these two lenses were different from the others you spoke of.

    Actually, I wish folks posting in the "Fun With" thread would mention more about the details ... "A7R 24-70" ... which 24-70? What shutter speed?

    So far, it seems the Sony native lenses do well, and I have found the Sony ZA lenses also do well using the Sony LA-EA4 adapter (and focus faster than the FEs) ... so I am leery of adding any non-Sony lenses+adapter for this camera ... other than the few M lenses I already have that seem okay.

    Thanks for all the info ...

    - Marc

    Thanks Marc, that's a fair reply.
    I basically agree with your take on things though I happen to have a somewhat different lens collection.
    Mine is heavy on Leica M and R lenses and some special Nikkor glass.

    The two tele lenses I referred to are the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 and the Leica APO-Telyt-R 280/4 and Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x and 2x.
    If you start reading at post #112 of http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/494...tml#post557838 you should get most of your questions answered. I would be happy to answer your additional ones.

    BTW, I followed with interest your color discussion on LUF and found you presented excellent arguments. Thanks. I continue to use my M9 and declined an M240 when my turn came.
    With best regards, K-H.

  33. #383
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Joseph Holmes wrote it would take around 700 g extra weight to mitigate shutter vibrations.

    Now the battery handgrip adds around 200g, and if one adds the Sony flash you add another 500g. Maybe not the best looking combo on a tripod, but shouldn't it work for those who are in need of it now?


    Anybody tested, what happens in burst mode, released by cable or remote control by the way?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #384
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by jfzander View Post
    Joseph Holmes wrote it would take around 700 g extra weight to mitigate shutter vibrations.

    Now the battery handgrip adds around 200g, and if one adds the Sony flash you add another 500g. Maybe not the best looking combo on a tripod, but shouldn't it work for those who are in need of it now?


    Anybody tested, what happens in burst mode, released by cable or remote control by the way?
    Adding mass to reduce vibration may help as long as it is firmly attached. Hanging stuff off the camera that is rather weakly coupled is not much help.
    @Ben, as far as landscape and shutter-lag, I have to report a few occasions shooting light houses when trying to time the shot with the rotation of the light became pretty frustrating (with other cameras since I do not own one of these). At least the rotation was periodic so it was more predictable. Waves breaking are not that predictable. I agree shutter-lag is not that big a deal for landscape but it does show up once and awhile.
    -bob

  35. #385
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Much to my irritation, I have noticed that shutter vibration can be induced by hitting the camera with a hammer. Setting off explosives nearby also has a noticeable effect. I'm working on a natural stabilisation system using fishing line and tethered seagulls, but it needs more testing.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #386
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    A somewhat traditional tried and true method might be to use a very thin coat of hard epoxy to fix the camera to a block of granite, perhaps a ton or two, and then to float that in a bath of mercury.
    -bob
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #387
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Bob, you're brilliant. All on the back of a flatbed truck and you're sorted for location shoots, presumably?

  38. #388
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    I found this budget tool to fix the shutter shake problem!
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #389
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by jfzander View Post
    I found this budget tool to fix the shutter shake problem!

  40. #390
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    My camera is perfect. But how do you stop the world from moving?
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #391
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    A somewhat traditional tried and true method might be to use a very thin coat of hard epoxy to fix the camera to a block of granite, perhaps a ton or two, and then to float that in a bath of mercury.
    -bob
    Nah, you can do better than that. Get a fine large piece of polished Italian marble, float that on a small lake of mercury and you have a good foundation for an almost vibration free platform for your devices. Of course, if you are not careful the mercury vapors might kill you.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #392
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    I tested and retested the shutter vibration at 200mm for the A7R and the D3. I covered quite a few variables and the results are here. Scroll to the bottom to the zoom lens part.

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



    Horizontal (landscape) vs Vertical (Portrait) orientations
    No shutter shock image vs all the others
    Promaster ($80) vs. Novoflex ($293) adapters
    Table Top Resting vs midway coupling of lens-camera
    D3 with No Mirror Lock up
    D3 with Mirror Lock up
    A7R vs. D3
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #393
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Victor started this thread with a caution that he had seen gross blur in some A7r images made with a 90mm. He provided samples and, sure enough, gross blur was evident - have a look at post #21. It appears that this blur results from the twangy focal plane shutter of the A7r resonating with something in the mounting system.

    Since then, we have had demonstrations of blur in normal lenses and short teles (which were a surprise to me), and blur in some fairly heroic lens systems that might well need perfect technique with most any camera. Blur is less surprising there. We have had admirably careful demonstrations of subtle blur and have benefited from some excellent suggestions as to how to minimize it and get the best possible performance out of this camera.

    At the same time, we have heard some strong opinions about reviewers who report blur. There have been passionate denials that blur exists, suggestions that reports of blur are conspiracies, exhortations for pixel peepers to get a life, statements that blur exists in all cameras and the A7r is no different and, finally, we have slumped exhausted into jokes about concrete/marble slabs and mercury lakes.

    By the way, that is not far off how some cryogenic CCDs are used for deep space observation so if you happen to have a spare headstone and a mercury lake....... Just saying.

    It has been a fun ride but I am not sure we are making much more progress in this thread. Some of us see blur and some do not. Some of us see blur in the samples provided by those who do not see it. Clearly, some of us are more sensitive to blur than others. Sadly, I am one of those sensitive types.

    This has been a warning to be more careful in testing the capabilities of any camera system that I decide to use seriously. I now understand the blur fairly well. I can avoid it at 90mm and (usually) ignore it with the FE55. For those who don't see blur and/or don't care, all the best. I envy you.

  44. #394
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    Victor started this thread with a caution that he had seen gross blur in some A7r images made with a 90mm. He provided samples and, sure enough, gross blur was evident - have a look at post #21. It appears that this blur results from the twangy focal plane shutter of the A7r resonating with something in the mounting system.

    Since then, we have had demonstrations of blur in normal lenses and short teles (which were a surprise to me), and blur in some fairly heroic lens systems that might well need perfect technique with most any camera. Blur is less surprising there. We have had admirably careful demonstrations of subtle blur and have benefited from some excellent suggestions as to how to minimize it and get the best possible performance out of this camera.

    At the same time, we have heard some strong opinions about reviewers who report blur. There have been passionate denials that blur exists, suggestions that reports of blur are conspiracies, exhortations for pixel peepers to get a life, statements that blur exists in all cameras and the A7r is no different and, finally, we have slumped exhausted into jokes about concrete/marble slabs and mercury lakes.

    By the way, that is not far off how some cryogenic CCDs are used for deep space observation so if you happen to have a spare headstone and a mercury lake....... Just saying.

    It has been a fun ride but I am not sure we are making much more progress in this thread. Some of us see blur and some do not. Some of us see blur in the samples provided by those who do not see it. Clearly, some of us are more sensitive to blur than others. Sadly, I am one of those sensitive types.

    This has been a warning to be more careful in testing the capabilities of any camera system that I decide to use seriously. I now understand the blur fairly well. I can avoid it at 90mm and (usually) ignore it with the FE55. For those who don't see blur and/or don't care, all the best. I envy you.

    Cunim:

    This has been a most interesting inquiry. Since I am within the return period on an A7R and deciding between it and an A7, this was a highly timely discussion. Unlike you though I've reassured myself that any blur that may exist is well within the normal parameters that I have experienced previously. Now I haven't spent time with either the D800 or D800E but other 24mp cameras and the A7 seem to exhibit comparable (if slightly lower) amounts of vibration blur in most circumstances. Without a doubt the A7R has a loud shutter and some of that noise equates to vibration in the camera. But for my needs it does not prevent the camera from providing the type of images I want. But as you say different folks have different expectations for equipment performance.

    Best of luck,
    John
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #395
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    Victor started this thread with a caution that he had seen gross blur in some A7r images made with a 90mm. He provided samples and, sure enough, gross blur was evident - have a look at post #21. It appears that this blur results from the twangy focal plane shutter of the A7r resonating with something in the mounting system.

    Since then, we have had demonstrations of blur in normal lenses and short teles (which were a surprise to me), and blur in some fairly heroic lens systems that might well need perfect technique with most any camera. Blur is less surprising there. We have had admirably careful demonstrations of subtle blur and have benefited from some excellent suggestions as to how to minimize it and get the best possible performance out of this camera.

    At the same time, we have heard some strong opinions about reviewers who report blur. There have been passionate denials that blur exists, suggestions that reports of blur are conspiracies, exhortations for pixel peepers to get a life, statements that blur exists in all cameras and the A7r is no different and, finally, we have slumped exhausted into jokes about concrete/marble slabs and mercury lakes.

    By the way, that is not far off how some cryogenic CCDs are used for deep space observation so if you happen to have a spare headstone and a mercury lake....... Just saying.

    It has been a fun ride but I am not sure we are making much more progress in this thread. Some of us see blur and some do not. Some of us see blur in the samples provided by those who do not see it. Clearly, some of us are more sensitive to blur than others. Sadly, I am one of those sensitive types.

    This has been a warning to be more careful in testing the capabilities of any camera system that I decide to use seriously. I now understand the blur fairly well. I can avoid it at 90mm and (usually) ignore it with the FE55. For those who don't see blur and/or don't care, all the best. I envy you.
    In order to get Sony's attention there needs to be lots of discussion about the issue. Hopefully it will network back to the right person at Sony and they will conclude that the flaw or perceived flaw could hurt sales and that the fix via a firmware update is warranted. They did that with the easily activated movie button on the NEX-7 - they got enough complaints and they responded with a firmware update. Big companies will and should respond to large numbers of complaints.

    Email Sony to address the shutter vibration issue. Whether you feel it's an issue or not why not campaign for the menu option. I've emailed them 2 times. The more complaints made the better: [email protected]
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #396
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    Victor started this thread with a caution that he had seen gross blur in some A7r images made with a 90mm. He provided samples and, sure enough, gross blur was evident - have a look at post #21. It appears that this blur results from the twangy focal plane shutter of the A7r resonating with something in the mounting system.

    Since then, we have had demonstrations of blur in normal lenses and short teles (which were a surprise to me), and blur in some fairly heroic lens systems that might well need perfect technique with most any camera. Blur is less surprising there. We have had admirably careful demonstrations of subtle blur and have benefited from some excellent suggestions as to how to minimize it and get the best possible performance out of this camera.

    At the same time, we have heard some strong opinions about reviewers who report blur. There have been passionate denials that blur exists, suggestions that reports of blur are conspiracies, exhortations for pixel peepers to get a life, statements that blur exists in all cameras and the A7r is no different and, finally, we have slumped exhausted into jokes about concrete/marble slabs and mercury lakes.

    By the way, that is not far off how some cryogenic CCDs are used for deep space observation so if you happen to have a spare headstone and a mercury lake....... Just saying.

    It has been a fun ride but I am not sure we are making much more progress in this thread. Some of us see blur and some do not. Some of us see blur in the samples provided by those who do not see it. Clearly, some of us are more sensitive to blur than others. Sadly, I am one of those sensitive types.

    This has been a warning to be more careful in testing the capabilities of any camera system that I decide to use seriously. I now understand the blur fairly well. I can avoid it at 90mm and (usually) ignore it with the FE55. For those who don't see blur and/or don't care, all the best. I envy you.
    Condescending remarks aside, I took the warning seriously, and when enough opinions accumulated decided to (reluctantly) run my own test. I sure the Hell do not want to do any paying work without knowing the full capabilities of any camera ... as well as its short-comings.

    I mounted the A7R on my rickety old Leitz Tilt-All that's 50 years old ... direct mount to the head, no QR. I had to wedge a piece of cardboard in the bottom of the center column tube because the bushings are worn Not the most stable platform, but it's worked for me in past.

    Then made a target using some WB cards with focus aids. Trotted out the Sony FE55/1.8ZA, Leica M75/2AA, and Leica 90/2.8 Elmarit. Used a Kipon M to NEX adapter. Fired up the Profotos to use the modeling lights.

    First photographed a control frame with the strobes lights ... A7R, ISO:50, 1/160 shutter, FE55 @ f/5.6 ... ambient was 3 stops under, strobe set for t5 1/1,000 duration ... fast duration renders any focal plane shutter effect irrelevant. It doesn't get any better than this. Contrast is at its peak.

    Turned off transmitter and then just used the modeling lights ... adjusting them as I altered the shutter speed from 1/20, 1/30, 1/40, etc, while watching the exposure reading in camera, Used the self-timer. f/5.6 used for all shots, manually focused using the 7.2X magnifier and peaking.

    Everything for each lens was constant except the shutter speed and level of light to make a proper exposure.

    Did a set of Landscape, Then did a set of portrait oriented shots including another control shot with the strobes.

    Here are some Landscape results:

    -Marc

  47. #397
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Here are a few Portrait oriented ones (No L bracket, just the camera hanging off to the side of the tripod).

    A few got a little funky with reflections because the ambient was starting to rise by the time I got to portrait orientation.

    The unmarked ones were the FE55 ... the title will tell you the settings.

    - Marc

  48. #398
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by cunim View Post
    Victor started this thread with a caution that he had seen gross blur in some A7r images made with a 90mm. He provided samples and, sure enough, gross blur was evident - have a look at post #21. It appears that this blur results from the twangy focal plane shutter of the A7r resonating with something in the mounting system.

    Since then, we have had demonstrations of blur in normal lenses and short teles (which were a surprise to me), and blur in some fairly heroic lens systems that might well need perfect technique with most any camera. Blur is less surprising there. We have had admirably careful demonstrations of subtle blur and have benefited from some excellent suggestions as to how to minimize it and get the best possible performance out of this camera.

    At the same time, we have heard some strong opinions about reviewers who report blur. There have been passionate denials that blur exists, suggestions that reports of blur are conspiracies, exhortations for pixel peepers to get a life, statements that blur exists in all cameras and the A7r is no different and, finally, we have slumped exhausted into jokes about concrete/marble slabs and mercury lakes.

    By the way, that is not far off how some cryogenic CCDs are used for deep space observation so if you happen to have a spare headstone and a mercury lake....... Just saying.

    It has been a fun ride but I am not sure we are making much more progress in this thread. Some of us see blur and some do not. Some of us see blur in the samples provided by those who do not see it. Clearly, some of us are more sensitive to blur than others. Sadly, I am one of those sensitive types.

    This has been a warning to be more careful in testing the capabilities of any camera system that I decide to use seriously. I now understand the blur fairly well. I can avoid it at 90mm and (usually) ignore it with the FE55. For those who don't see blur and/or don't care, all the best. I envy you.
    Funny, this is not my take on the contents of this thread. I saw very clear shake on K-H's pics (thanks again for the effort, K-H, much appreciated!), and I didn't see a single post denying that they were shaken almost to the point of being stirred.
    The question then was "how and when does this happen?", and, so far, the evidence pointed towards the probability being much, much greater, if not exclusively when the camera and lens are connected to a tripod via a lens collar and a shot is taken in portrait mode.
    So, no, I don't see the world being split between the "open-eyed" and the "blind" (to shake, that is).
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #399
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Looks good to me.
    Of course there might be those who are looking for what it would do with a real long lens, but heck, that always is a good test of tripods and floor vibration.
    I had one camera, The Phase DF actually, that was fine except at 1/15 of a sec. Boy it hated that shutter speed.
    -bob

  50. #400
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Shutter Vibration

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Looks good to me.
    Of course there might be those who are looking for what it would do with a real long lens, but heck, that always is a good test of tripods and floor vibration.
    I had one camera, The Phase DF actually, that was fine except at 1/15 of a sec. Boy it hated that shutter speed.
    -bob
    Bob, part of the assertion was shutter shock effecting normal focal lengths to short teles at certain slower shutter speeds ... specifically a 90 was mentioned ... (as well as super teles which are always demanding).

    It is supposed to be more pronounced when shooting in portrait mode.

    All I care about are normals and short telephotos used for people work. Thus testing my 75/2AA, 90/2.8 Elmarit, and the FE55.

    Even really large on my 30" screens I can't replicate that. Perhaps a touch @200%, but man that isn't splitting hairs, it's splitting the atoms that make up the hairs.

    I also discovered that the 75/2AA produces some CA out toward the edges which softens it a tad ...but no matter, I use that lens for portraits and vignette the edges anyway. The M90/2.8 was fine. At f/5.6 the FE55 is sharp out to the corners.

    Also noted that the Auto WB is very good on this camera, but better when using the FE lens

    Here are three portrait oriented shots montaged together ... FE55 and strobe, M90 at 1/40, FE55 at 1/40.

    Do not know what is going on with other folks, but I'm glad it isn't happeing to me ... for once -

    -Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •