RF's do let you see what is happening at the moment of exposure and it's pretty easy to see if you are moving the camera during an exposure - this means it's possible to practice and perfect your release technique in a way you can't do with an SLR. Mirror vibration is only relevant for telephoto or macro work and has nothing to do with the SLR vs RF argument err sorry disscussion.If you want the sharpest picture with either system - use a tripod as even at speeds of 250th and above less tha rock steady camera support can effect sharpness. I remember back in the day when I used M's that it was possible to see a slightly uneven sharpness band across a frame which coincided with a point during the exposure where the slit travels across the frame and the camera slightly moved.
Pondria, I was not ...ing with CarstenW. Carsten is one of the finest FMer here and I have great respect for him. I only tried to stimulate the concept and hoping that someone will get the answer from the information that I posted. I already proove the concept of mirror vibration was a myth. In fact you even provided the data. KJbruin read well and got the answer.
AF SLR Steady Time Requirement = Lag Time (Time to lock AF + Time for mirror clearance + Lag Time after Mirror Clearance) + Exposure Time
RF Steady Time Requirement = Lag Time + Exposure Time
In general most camera companies will not publish their lag time data. However, for folks that want to do lightning photography would prefer a camera system with a short lag time. SLR camera lag time could range any where from 65 milliseconds with the modern camera like the Canon 20D to hundred of seconds such as the Pentax 645 N with a wopping lag time of 250 ms. Amazingly the Rollei 6008 lag time is <100 ms. One of the most amazing SLR camera is the Canon EOS-1N RS with less than 10 ms. Therefore, during the lag time is when your hands are steady but during the actual exposure time they are not steady. Thus explains the crucial time when it counts the steady hands fail with the SLR system, except for the Canon EOS-1N RS.
shirozina,
Thanks for bringing out my other point with regard to the maximum attained resolution of an image system requirement (tripod, mirror lock up and proper light exposure) especially with macro and telephoto lens and how none of those are relevant to our discussion here.
When using a tripod, mirror vibration is most visible at 1/15 sec and thereabout, because this is usually the duration of vibration.
With faster shutter speeds it becomes less visible because of the faster exposure, with slower shutter speeds it becomes less visible because the duration of vibration is shorter than the exposure, hence it affects less the creation of the image.
Indeed with shutter speeds longer than 2 sec it's probably irrelevant the use of mirror lockup.
A good tripod also helps with mirror vibration, because it absorbs part of it.
Try to use a long lens on tripod without using the tripod collar, you'll see that it's less steady and mirror vibration causes camera's shake.
Using the tripod collar makes the whole system steadier and image sharpness is less affected by mirror vibration.
I agree that the ergonomic of a RF isn't any better than that of a SLR, indeed I find most DSLRs more comfortable to handhold than the M8.
Weight is also not an issue, on the contrary I always found heavier cameras more easy to handhold steady.
IMO the absence of mirror black-out helps in getting steady shots.
If I try to use the mirror lock-up for handheld shots I always get more blurry images, because I can't see the image so maybe my brain is fooled by not seeing any point of reference.
Viewing the image during the exposure probably helps in being more steady.
So in the end I do think it's all about the (lack of) mirror
Macro,
Try to hand hold the Dual Lens Reflex (DLR) system instead of the Single Lens Reflex (SLR) system at 1/25 s. Here your eyes are in constant view with the scene you are shooting. Do you think you will attain a useable image?
The lack of mirror is the difference between the rangefinder and the SLR systems. However, the long lag time due to the mirror clearance (in the case with AF camera, additional lag time requires for the aufocus system to lock in), is the primarily cause of not attaining a useable image at 1/15, 1/25 s and etc. At these shutter speeds in addition to the long lag time, the steady hands are challenged at their limits.
In that case I think that it would be just like a rangefinder. There's a mirror, but it doesn't move and there's no black-out.
I partly agree with the shutter lug, because after a bit of experience you know when the exposure actually starts.
IMO it's the absence of vision during the exposure plus the mirror vibration at certain shutter speeds that don't help.
Macro,
Excuse my previous post regarding to the DLR. That system will not be able to prove my point. Thus, if I cannot find a system that will allow a person with normal vision to hand hold the camera at slow shutter speeds (1/15, 1/25 s) without black out, then I have no means to acquire data to disprove or prove your concept as an additional cause. However, even after said that I believe that at these shutter speeds (1/15, 1/25 s) the image improvement with rangefinder over SLR is mainly due to lag time. I can train myself to hand hold the camera steady without viewing through it. Another potential way to prove or disprove your concept is to have a person without vision to try to steady hold the camera; of course you would have to test first that folks with lack of vision have as steady of hands as normal folks. In addition, the mirror vibration concept has to be ruled out since the shutter speed we are talking here would not have major impact on the outcome of the image quality particularly with the wide angle lens that we are discussed here regarding to the big leap from a useable image acquired from the rangefinder versus the non useable image of the SLR at these shutter speeds (1/15, 1/25 s).
Edited by Pham Minh Son on Dec 14, 2006 at 06:41 AM GMT
I can train myself to hand hold the camera steady without viewing through it.
I can't. It's much more easy to me to be accostumed to shutter lag.
In addition, the mirror vibration concept has to be ruled out since the shutter speed we are talking here would not have major impact on the outcome of the image quality.
Maybe, maybe not. Depending on the SLR, speeds from 1/8 to 1/30 could be quite sensible to mirror vibration, at least from my experience.
Macro,
Even with the best mirror damping SLR system where the effect of mirror vibration is not the cause of keeping an image versus throwing away an image, you cannot get keeper images at shutter speeds (1/15, 1/25 s). The camera system based on your experience at 1/30 s must be a very bad damping mirror vibration system. I have not come across one where at 1/30 s and without mirror lock up the image quality is a throw away. Can you tell me what that system is so I can avoid it?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Nice shots David, both! Which lenses did you use -- 90 for the bird and 24 for the landscape?
Jack,
Thanks for the kind words. The landscape shot was taken with the 24 and the bird with the 75 f/2.0. The crop below was taken from a different shot (a bit sharper but worse composition) with the same lens. I think it's a better indication of what this lens and camera can do, at least in my hands. Both bird shots were taken handheld, the earlier post at 1/60th, this one at 1/90th
Can anybody comment how constant the cyan cast is when using a lens with IR-Cut-filter?
I wonder if depends on the light?
Does it depend on the distance filter to lens? (I mean would a slim filter lead to different cast than a normal filter?
Does it depend on the f-stop?
Does it show in B&W (I mean as a kind of vignetting?)
I await my M8 next week and would like to understand as much as I can when I start using it.
Cheers, Tom
My first impressions with the 50/1.4asph (on my rd1) are kind of similar with Guy´s.
My impression is that it has the sharpness, contrast and saturation of the newer asph lenses, but this combined with a "creamy" bokeh. http://www.pbase.com/tstreng/image/71660527.jpg
I prefer the 50lux_asph clearly to the 50cron.
The Noctilux I like too, but its kinde of a special combination of contrasty image with an extremly special/different bokeh.
Pham Minh Son wrote:
Congratulation KJbruin,
You got it!
Pondria, I was not ...ing with CarstenW. Carsten is one of the finest FMer here and I have great respect for him. I only tried to stimulate the concept and hoping that someone will get the answer from the information that I posted. I already proove the concept of mirror vibration was a myth. In fact you even provided the data. KJbruin read well and got the answer.
AF SLR Steady Time Requirement = Lag Time (Time to lock AF + Time for mirror clearance + Lag Time after Mirror Clearance) + Exposure Time
RF Steady Time Requirement = Lag Time + Exposure Time
In general most camera companies will not publish their lag time data. However, for folks that want to do lightning photography would prefer a camera system with a short lag time. SLR camera lag time could range any where from 65 milliseconds with the modern camera like the Canon 20D to hundred of seconds such as the Pentax 645 N with a wopping lag time of 250 ms. Amazingly the Rollei 6008 lag time is <100 ms. One of the most amazing SLR camera is the Canon EOS-1N RS with less than 10 ms. Therefore, during the lag time is when your hands are steady but during the actual exposure time they are not steady. Thus explains the crucial time when it counts the steady hands fail with the SLR system, except for the Canon EOS-1N RS.
shirozina,
Thanks for bringing out my other point with regard to the maximum attained resolution of an image system requirement (tripod, mirror lock up and proper light exposure) especially with macro and telephoto lens and how none of those are relevant to our discussion here.
Pham Minh Son wrote:
shirozina,
Thanks for bringing out my other point with regard to the maximum attained resolution of an image system requirement (tripod, mirror lock up and proper light exposure) especially with macro and telephoto lens and how none of those are relevant to our discussion here.
-Son Do I feel the unpleasant chill of sarcasm Son?
Guy Mancuso wrote:
I agree Tom the 50lux asph just has a nice feel to it , very sharp wide open but does butter up nicely. i almost bought a Nocti but it is highly specialized. may still buy it but not in any hurry now after I see what the Lux does. i used every lens i had on this trip just this series was mostly the Lux. My 28mm is bad and is getting exchanged right now but another great lens. Actually there are no dogs here
I only got the Noctilux because I got it for a really good price, but then f1 can be fun.
What has been wrong with your 28mm?
Guy Mancuso wrote:
i think the perfect kep on the body focal length is the 28mm and it has the best framelines
Couldn't agree more.
I love my 28 Elmarit pre-asph, it does a great job on the M8, but I'm going to get the 28 Summicron, mainly for the f/2.
Hope it will be at least as good.
Tom,
My 21mm is being coded in Solms and I have not used that lens on the M8 yet . But my 28 Summicron ASPH is sharp all the way to the corners at f/2.8. It sounds like yours may need a calibration....
AGeoJO wrote:
Tom,
My 21mm is being coded in Solms and I have not used that lens on the M8 yet . But my 28 Summicron ASPH is sharp all the way to the corners at f/2.8. It sounds like yours may need a calibration....
I have to shoot some more tests with that 28mm when I get my M8. The lens was at Leica and say said everything was fine but I am not sure.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
50 lux . i will post the color shot of this pretty damn good
Guy,
Your lawn needs mowing.
Seriously though, I have the 50 Lux on loan from David at Dale while I wait for a new Noctilux.
Now I am wondering. The weight difference doesn't bother me, but what is your impressionabout that extra stop? Or is the the bokeh thatmatters with the noctilux
. But my 28 Summicron ASPH is sharp all the way to the corners at f/2.8. It sounds like yours may need a calibration....