Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,740   Posts: 1,515,548   Online: 1098
      
Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 113
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    Images
    22
    That video is silly for a number of reasons. Ask a physics teacher if you're interested. Suffice to say that many, many real-world photo tests have demonstrated that it does matter, for certain (but not all) common conditions. These are extremely easy to find online if you don't feel like going to the library ... google things like "mirror lock-up test".

  2. #12
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Oh yes that video :rolleyes: which proves, to a high degree of certainity, that if you balance a penny on a hassie and fire it then the penny won't budge.

    The question is, what else does it prove
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #13
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,936
    Quote Originally Posted by zumbido View Post
    That video is silly for a number of reasons. Ask a physics teacher if you're interested. Suffice to say that many, many real-world photo tests have demonstrated that it does matter, for certain (but not all) common conditions. These are extremely easy to find online if you don't feel like going to the library ... google things like "mirror lock-up test".
    I post the video because I get tired of seeing posts claiming that a Hasselblad with a 80mm lens or a Nikon SLR with at 50mm lens, both so called normal lenses, cannot be hand held for shutter speed of 1/60 seconds. Which is a bunch of $#!+. Normal body motion, limit cycling, from breathing to the heart pumping cause more motion than the so called mirror slap. Claims that an RF can be hand held for 1/5 second are also a bunch of $#!+. Below 1/[lens focal length] it becomes necessary to use a tripod or set the camera down on a stable surface, some for sooner than others. The duration of mirror slap is so short due to dampening that a 10 second exposure is not going to show any effect, but it may be wise to lock up a mirror on long exposures as a good practice.

    If one were to down enough brewskis then at 1/125 or 1/250 seconds one can get blur with either an SLR or RF camera.

    Since I have been an engineering professor and technically I am a rocket scientist I will ignore the comment about asking a high school physics teacher posting on line for advice.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #14
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    Claims that an RF can be hand held for 1/5 second are also a bunch of $#!+.
    Well I disagree. I can handhold to that speed for sure and get acceptable sharpness. The "trick" is not to use the shutter release at all but to use the timer instead. If you do that you will find that 1/5 is difficult but not impossible. It is a low probability shot under many conditions, but one in two or three shots will be just fine if the wind isn't blowing too hard

    But I do agree, Steve, that a hassie (or rb) is certainly handholdable to 1/60. If that's really what you want to prove then why not simply show shots taken handheld at 1/60? The penny thing proves nothing in this regard.

    Along those lines, this shot was handheld at 1/15 or 1/20, as I recall, with a mamiya 645 afd. 1/60 is nothing.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  5. #15
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    533
    If I use a short shutter speed, I do not notice any difference because the shutter speed is fast enough to freeze any movement caused by mirror vibration.

    If I use a long shutter speed, I do not notice any difference because the mirror vibration time is insignificantly short compared to the long amount of time the shutter is actually open.

    I do, however, notice image degradation caused by mirror vibration when I mount my camera on a telescope and use a shutter speed between 1/2 second and 1/15th second. Thank goodness my SLR's mirror lock-up feature is very useful for avoiding this degradation.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    I post the video because I get tired of seeing posts claiming that a Hasselblad with a 80mm lens or a Nikon SLR with at 50mm lens, both so called normal lenses, cannot be hand held for shutter speed of 1/60 seconds. Which is a bunch of $#!+. Normal body motion, limit cycling, from breathing to the heart pumping cause more motion than the so called mirror slap. Claims that an RF can be hand held for 1/5 second are also a bunch of $#!+.
    All of this, agreed. Sometimes.

    Below 1/[lens focal length] it becomes necessary to use a tripod or set the camera down on a stable surface, some for sooner than others. The duration of mirror slap is so short due to dampening that a 10 second exposure is not going to show any effect, but it may be wise to lock up a mirror on long exposures as a good practice.
    All of this, disagreed. Mirror slap does indeed show an effect, in common conditions with a normal lens, even up to 1/125 and beyond. See Thornton 2000 pg65 for one published example... there are many to be found on the 'net of course. That said, proper holding or stabilization technique can mitigate though not eliminate the effect, and some bodies are more prone than others (bodies for formats larger than 35mm seem to suffer less, I'd imagine--but don't know--because of their weight).

    Reciprocal of focal length is overly optimistic in my experience. Most folks without training can effectively handhold at one to two stops faster than that, no more. Average person seems to need 125 or 250 on a 50mm lens on 135 to get "acceptably" sharp [edit to add: at 8x10 or above, depending on the image you might not notice the effect enough to be a problem at smaller sizes]. But, that's one that people can and do argue about endlessly, so, to each their own experience.

    Since I have been an engineering professor and technically I am a rocket scientist I will ignore the comment about asking a high school physics teacher posting on line for advice.
    Hey, cheers for not taking it seriously. I'm new to this forum and so far it seems much more pleasantly easygoing than most. I will say that the PhD "rocket scientists" and fluid dynamicists and whatnot that I work with have often forgotten how to tie their shoes at this point though...

  7. #17
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,936
    Quote Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
    I do, however, notice image degradation caused by mirror vibration when I mount my camera on a telescope and use a shutter speed between 1/2 second and 1/15th second. Thank goodness my SLR's mirror lock-up feature is very useful for avoiding this degradation.
    I would submit that the focal length of a telescope is much longer than camera lenses [ignoring mirror lenses] and therefore 1/[focal length] << 1/2 second or 1/15 seconds.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  8. #18
    frank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bit north of Toronto
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    514
    Images
    2
    Think of the Pentax 67. It's mirror is larger and heavier, with greater inertia and momentum, but it illustrates the concept of image degrading mirror induced vibration. A 35mm slr's mirror is smaller, but so is the film size, which needs to be enlarged (along with any lack of crispness) to a greater degree, to obtain the same final print size.
    Art should unsettle the comfortable, and comfort the unsettled.

    My photo website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

  9. #19
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Q:Does "no mirror" really = sharper negs?

    A: Sometimes.

    Exactly.

    Hand held? Probably not.

    On a tripod? Probably.

    A rangefinder just is not the kind of camera I would use on a tripod (or any 35mm camera, for that matter, except for in uncommon situations)...therefore, the lack of a mirror has no advantage for me. It is not one of the advantages of a rangefinder, IMO (in terms of "camera shake"...not in terms of lens design/collapse-ability).
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  10. #20
    SFC
    SFC is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ashland, OR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    25
    I recently tested some of my cameras on an old rickety tripod to test the shaking that each camera showed. A laser pointer was strapped to each camera. Here are the results I saw, observing the light about 30 feet away, and with each camera on "B.":
    Canon F-1 (new): 0 shaking. Very damped mirror/shutter. That's probably why they left out a mirror up feature on this model.
    Bronica S2: Even with a huge, noisy mirror, very little vibration.
    Leica M2: some side-to-side shaking in certain circumstances. This can be felt even when off the tripod.
    Pentax k20d: definite side-to-side movement, in spite of vertically-travelling shutter. Impossible to dampen, even on larger Gitzo CF tripod.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin