I sure would love to see his setup since I can't reproduce it. I'm sure there will be others who will try to duplicate this with the 55 in coming weeks so I can wait and see if others can produce this blur with such a short focal length. I'm not ready to call his results bogus, but it goes against what most are seeing - no blur with 85 and below.
Kit Laughlin wrote:
Has anyone evaluated an A7 body in this regard? Interested, as Philip reported,
is a critical range, to be sure.
I did shoot some test shots with A7 (with electronic first curtain OFF - I'm about to get 2nd body and would like A7r if Sony will provide ways to around the shutter caused blur), mostly using panorama head since Lloyd and others were covering "the best possible scenario" with A7r and I didn't want to put effort on something other people were already testing.
Naturally when electronic first curtain is enabled there is no blur at any shutter speed. A7 with electronic first curtain disabled on panorama head with Leica APO 180 and Zeiss APO 2/135 was generating 2-4px blur.
In A7 when electronic first curtain is enabled there is NO MECHANICAL MOVEMENT before the moment second curtain starts to move (=at end of exposure). Before that there are just electrons moving and they can't shake camera. However it would be possible there could be blur on that long edge of image, which is open longest. Meaning if A7 shutter closes from bottom to up, and because image is inverted, bottom of image might have some blur. If A7 shutter closes from up to bottom, then it would be top of image having possibility for movement. Even on panorama head with adjustments skrew etc. all open/not locked there is no blur visible in A7 image when shoot with electronic first curtain with Leica APO 180.
sflxn wrote:
I sure would love to see his setup since I can't reproduce it. I'm sure there will be others who will try to duplicate this with the 55 in coming weeks so I can wait and see if others can produce this blur with such a short focal length. I'm not ready to call his results bogus, but it goes against what most are seeing - no blur with 85 and below.
He used "Really Right Stuff TVC-34L"-tripod with "Arca Swiss Cube"-head for the "Sony A7R Shutter Vibration at 55mm (Dolls)", no link as it's for subscribers only.
With 55 you are not trying to find any 3px blur, it will be smaller (hopefully). Depending on your setup your should get blur from 1/4px to 1/2px. 1/4px is equivalent of downgrading resolution of A7r to roughly A7 level, since it has 22,7% more resolution - of course AA and no-AA affects so it's apples to orange, but the point is not to compare cameras BUT to make sure user is getting 36Mpix worth results.
I have always wondered why people want to test it with setup, which is best possible. Maybe people can use the perfect setup in the field - in practice I can't or don't like to take my big Gitzo with big head to everywhere, so I have to consider also tiny Gitzo Traveler with miniature head. If one shoots panoramas I recommend to check with panorama head; camera is vertically and panorama head is flimsy compared to proper head.
I am kind of unhappy it is not as good as the a7 in this regard but the bar is high. I will await what happens and carry on testing with 'real world' goals in mind, so more detailed distance for 21mm to 100mm lenses handheld at 1/2-3 FL - I expect it to be fine as many are finding for themselves. There is quite a distribution of users, from 'it goes back' to what's to worry about?'. You get the feeling there are many unknowns.
The a7 would be much easier to live with I feel overall and Lloyd has reports of up to 800mm with no camera-induced vibration, if we can call it that.
I am kind of unhappy it is not as good as the a7 in this regard but the bar is high. I will await what happens and carry on testing with 'real world' goals in mind, so more detailed distance for 21mm to 100mm lenses handheld at 1/2-3 FL - I expect it to be fine as many are finding for themselves. There is quite a distribution of users, from 'it goes back' to what's to worry about?'. You get the feeling there are many unknowns.
The a7 would be much easier to live with I feel overall and Lloyd has reports of up to 800mm with no camera-induced vibration, if we can call it that. ...Show more →
The problem here is that Sony doesn't have a stellar track record on releasing firmware updates to address issues. Many A7r owners are likely aware of this and so they're more inclined to return their bodies while they can rather than giving Sony the benefit of the doubt and then getting stuck with the body. Even if the issue doesn't affect their shooting they still must consider the hit they'll take on resale value, esp. since V2 of the product will likely not have the issue.
Philip, when we met the other day, I mentioned that this was one of the reasons I am planning on getting the A7. But a note of caution, even so; (I do not have the specs in front of me for the A7) but with the GX7 which also has a electronic shutter, you are limited to 3200 ISO (not a deal breaker for most work) AND you can get skewed verticals if you are panning while shooting (a still image version of 'jello-cam' in the video world).
Not a problem in the way I use cameras, but I have seen some od images over at getDPI which show this problem under pretty standard shooing conditions.
For me though, the advantages of the GX7's electronic shutter (but not the A7's) is that the GX7's shutter is completely silent—and I prefer to work this way if I can.
Well, what i mean by his setup is where does he have the camera and lens anchored. From every source I've read on this topic, the vibration is significantly reduced when the camera base is locked down. It's mainly long lens with tripod collars anchored to the ballhead that is causing problems. The camera floats out in space and the shutter shock causes the vibration. The 55mm is small. I can't see him anchoring his setup down from anywhere else other than his camera body. So, there we have 2 points of contention. < 85mm and anchored at the camera body. Then the third point of contention is I spent an hour doing this, looking for blur, and could not find any. Perhaps I need to look at it down at the pixel level. I'm unwilling to do that if it's occuring down at that level.
Believe it or not, just having a sturdy tripod and decent ballhead isn't enough. A truck rolling down the highway can introduce vibration. It's actually very hard to lock everything down. I can attest to smaller ballheads are not sturdy enough. Any play or wiggle means the camera can vibrate because of wind or nearby traffic. I've had several ballheads with similar design to the RRS. I don't believe in their sturdiness. Anyway, my point is that if you're out shooting a landscape photo and your rig is not fully rock solid, it doesn't matter if you have an A7 or A7R, you'll likely still get vibration outside of the shutter. Trying to gain 1/4 pixel blur in a controlled environment might as well go out the window, when you're shooting outside. I find it extrmely hard to get pixel perfect images ever. I'm not sure I will want to waste my time chasing a 1/4 pixel blur. Looking at the images at a 3:1 magnification, I didn't see any blur. If put it on my computer as a wall paper, I won't see any blur. If I print it out, I won't see any blur. Now, if we're talking 2-3 pixel blur, then I am interested.
Kit Laughlin wrote:
Philip, when we met the other day, I mentioned that this was one of the reasons I am planning on getting the A7. But a note of caution, even so; (I do not have the specs in front of me for the A7) but with the GX7 which also has a electronic shutter, you are limited to 3200 ISO (not a deal breaker for most work) AND you can get skewed verticals if you are panning while shooting (a still image version of 'jello-cam' in the video world).
Not a problem in the way I use cameras, but I have seen some od images over at getDPI which show this problem under pretty standard shooing conditions.
For me though, the advantages of the GX7's electronic shutter (but not the A7's) is that the GX7's shutter is completely silent—and I prefer to work this way if I can....Show more →
The A7 doesn't have a full-electronic shutter option like the Pany MFT bodies have. FYI, Sony is probably working on global shutters for future NEX/Alpha products. A global shutter provides for a full electronic shutter mechanism without the rolling-shutter jello effects seen on Pany's electronic shutter mechanism. Sony's new 1" IMX174 sensor has a global shutter.
snaps, that's very interesting, and very welcome. Global shutters have been the gold standard in the video world for some time, and fitting this technology to stills/video cameras like the A7 series makes such good sense to me.
Just realized if you use the battery grip with two batteries, problem solved. Clever Sony to do that. Without the battery grip though any small lens (18-55mm) isn’t going to be that huge of a problem.
sflxn, you are so right. I did some exhaustive (and exhausting) shot sequences and found so many factors impinge on any findings. And you can actually see them in practice at 100%. Aperture change between best aperture and 2nd best aperture; actual focus (not easy but prob as good as anything out there); atmospherics (UV.dust, wind); shot technique variation; other! These work indepedently and may often cancel each other out..so the shutter shock for *what I need* is a non-issue if I can be happy with longest lens I generally use - 100mm.
Anyway, the bottom line is that the camera can be very successfully used handheld at 1/2 x FL. This holds for all four lenses tried so far. The crucial one is the longest of course, but given 36Mp as a starting point, a crop to say 24Mp gives you much more reach provided sharpenss is 'acceptable'.
The camera is also very kind to humans and their skin - surprisingly so given some talk to the contrary - as it's more lens specific to me anyway.
Two a7r 100% crops, lens is Contax 100mm f3.5. The first is on a pretty careful Gitzo Traveller tripod / Markins Q3 setup anchored by a shock cord but using handholding to trip the shutter, holding the camera as steady as I can. This one was shot at 1/125s at f5.6 (best aperture) and ISO 50 (but 1/50s is the same IQ). The range being reported as being susceptible to 'shutter shock' is ~1/50s - 1/150s.
Second image was handheld at f5.6 at 1/200s at ISO 200. [I did 5 shots at these exact settings and all were the same re sharpness.] Same capture sharpening for both images as I want final image appearance to compare final output settings I use.
Focus was on the small bush in front of the smaller window of the house, the house is ~105 metres away, I just walked it. The grass strands at bottom right are maybe 2mm thick. I have no idea how large a print this equates to. It might be large.
ISO 50, 1/125s, f5.6, tripod used, capture sharpened
ISO 200, 1/200s, f5.6, handheld, capture sharpened
I am not sure, but I think that my RRS L bracket for my A7r shipped today. If I receive it shortly, I will running tests to try to minimize vibration with longer lenses. I will be running tests with my A7r with my Leica R 280mm f4 Apo Telyt and possibly other lenses particularly in the portrait orientation. I will report back with my findings hopefully in the not too distant future.
carstenw wrote:
You will be mounting the A7R with the 280/4 via L-bracket??
Hi Carsten,
No. I am going to try to lock the camera in place (lessen motion) on the RRS L bracket using a ProMediaGear Arca Swiss type QR clamp attached to a Variable Friction Arm and another ProMediaGear Arca Swiss type QR clamp at the other end of the arm clamped to the RRS plate on my 280/4 lens. The lens itself will be mounted to my Kirk Arca Swiss type QR on my Markins M20 head.
Interesting work, but it seems like you are telling us that you shoot 784mm lens, which at 1/length would be shot at 1/750 or so, and you shoot it at 1/160 and it's not sharp?
I'm using the acratech L-plate as RRS don't make an L-plate for the battery grip on the A7R yet. It's eliminated any shutter shake either with camera or lens mount. Some pics and comments halfway done my review here:
