Thanks for the explanation, Moose. Actually I do crop quite a bit, this is the
one area where I have no self-imposed limitations, since cropping was also
common in the wet printing days.
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
YNWA
On Mar 18, 2013, at 10:52 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 3/18/2013 12:13 AM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>> The GF2 and 14-42mm is my standard cycling outfit. W
>
> Probably not the lens to which I refer. The GF2 kit includes this lens.
> <http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/standard.html#i_014-042mm_f035-056_panasonic>
> Scroll down to the next entry, the "X lens" that I have been talking about,
> an exceptionally compact, slightly odd lens.
> It has their new coating tech, an improved OIS system, push tabs for zoom and
> focus, rather than rings and extends and
> contracts under power when the camera body is turned on and off.
>
> Depending on whose tests you read, it is slightly better or not quite as good
> optically as the preceding 14-45 and the
> 14-42 I presume you have.
>
> But no on to the real issue. :-)
>
>> what is the "1/160 & 1/200 shutter speed issue"? Never heard of it.
>
> That you have never heard of it simply shows that you ignore the long,
> boring, techie posts/discussions here. :-)
>
> Since the inception of µ4/3, there have been voices crying out in the
> wilderness about blurry images in a certain range
> of shutter speeds. I noticed something odd going on when I got my E-M5, which
> turns out to have been the same thing.
>
> The problem has been variously attributed to several things, individually or
> in combination, including particular lenses
> at particular settings, Panny in-lens IS, Oly in-body IS, shutters, etc.
> Because posts on the web have an indefinite,
> sometimes apparently infinite, life, it's still easy to run across such noise.
>
> Some folks, however have tracked it all down to shutter vibration. On an ILC
> with all mechanical shutter, there are four
> separate shutter actions to make an exposure. The shutter closes for sensor
> reset, opens and closes to make the exposure
> and opens again for live view. Whether it is the first and/or second action
> that causes the trouble, I don't know,
> although there are claims that it's the first closing.
>
> The range of shutter speeds where the effect has been noted is 1/20-1/200,
> but "The actual risk of shutter shock and the
> exact shutter speed range affected vary considerably with camera and lens
> makes and models."
>
> It's been pretty well documented by now that this is a real effect. Oly, at
> least, was aware of it from early on, and
> provided a work around deep in the extended menus which they then proceeded
> to gloss over in their camera instructions.
> More on this in another post.
>
> For the way you display images, always full frame, and at modest web sizes, I
> imagine it is seldom, if ever, visible.
> For those who print large and/or pixel peep, it is pretty obvious. A few
> people have documented it on the web. There
> are probably other examples than these, but they make the point:
>
> About shutter shock on a Panny GH2.
> <http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/micro-four-thirds-shutter-shake.html#more>
>
> A very through article on E-M5 with 12-50 lens, which defines the issue
> clearly, investigates the effectiveness of the
> Oly Anti-Shock settings and has good example images.
> <http://cameraergonomics.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/micro-43-shutter-shock-revisited-omd-em.html>
>
> Tests of Panny GX1, Oly E-P3 and E-M5. As he makes no mention of it, I think
> the author was not aware of the Oly
> Anti-Shock settings and I assume they were not used. This may explain why it
> wasn't immediately aware of what was wrong
> with some of my E-M5 images, as it has much less of a problem than the Panny.
> <http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/pz14-42/shutter_lens.html>
>
> In this test of the "X" lens on a G3, the tester found "There is an issue
> with this lens when used at the 1/160 or 1/200
> shutter speed setting, hand-holding a camera; images produced seem to have an
> induced blurriness to them, with or
> without image stabilization employed. This blurriness does not occur when the
> camera is locked down to a tripod."
> <http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1458/cat/69>
>
> This differs from the problems over a wider shutter speed range, both hand
> held and on a good tripod, with different
> camera and lenses above. Obviously, there is a lot of variation across
> camera-lens combinations.
>
> I know essentially nothing about the extensive range of Panny µ4/3 bodies.
> I'm not aware of any efforts on their part to
> minimize this effect. But I imagine both manufacturers would be extremely
> reluctant to highlight the problem by talking
> up their cure on later models. That's certainly been true of Oly.
>
> In any case, if you aren't having a problem, not to worry. :-) Other than
> perhaps for fast moving sports, for which
> they are not ideal anyway, all the Pens, from at least the E-PL1 on, and the
> E-M5, easily avoid the problem with a
> simple menu setting.
>
> Shutter Shocked Moose
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|