Here are pix of the three parts I will use, prior to their heading off to the local machine shop yesterday.
Guest post by Joseph Holmes.
Unfortunately, Sony has a problem with the A7R which is serious for a significant segment of uses, involving longer lenses on a tripod, and especially lenses which are connected via a lens foot or adapter foot to the tripod. The first curtain shutter shake is too great to avoid motion blur in many longer-lens situations. A firmware update to provide an option to add a delay between the two motions of the first curtain would be a big help, but might not be enough to solve the problem entirely.
Lloyd Chambers at DigLloyd.com, and two more of us (including myself), in separate series of carefully done experiments, have found consistent, clear and certain proof of a serious issue with the camera bouncing too much during exposures at various speeds, typically 1/100th of a second being the worst. The shutter shake seems, if anything, to be worse than when the same lens is connected to a Canon 5D II with full mirror slap. The motion is primarily in the direction of the shutter: up and down with a horizontal image and side to side with a vertical image (see samples below).
This happens more with longer lenses and more with lenses where the camera itself is not mounted directly to the tripod, rather the lens is mounted via its own foot, or its mounted to the foot of an adapter, so the camera is at the end of a “branch” sticking out in space, unsupported so that it is more readily made to shake. The further the mounting point is from the camera’s sensor plane, the worse the motion blur in the capture. And it is also highly dependent on the shutter speed, with longer exposures like 1/4 and longer being unaffected and the worst blur usually occurring at 1/100th of a second (strangely). Lloyd also observed a sudden up-tick in motion blur at 1/500th with a Leica 280 mm lens. I have been seeing the problem at focal lengths between 120 and 160mm (the longest lens I have which will work on the camera at the moment), as has my friend Mike Schultz, with exposures between 100 mm and 280 mm. Our results and observations are in close agreement.
I just tried a series of hand-held exposures with a fairly light weight, f3.5 150mm non-native lens at both 1/100th and 1/160th, in both horizontal and vertical position, and there was no clear pattern of shutter vibration causing movement in the direction of shutter movement, at either shutter speed. Some where sharp, some obviously moved. So that’s good, as this implies that the self-induced vibration is not necessarily affecting hand-held cameras, for whatever reason.
It has also been conclusively shown by Lloyd’s testing that the electronic first curtain of the A7 eliminates all of this pernicious camera shake. (Unless there is another important difference between the two shutters, where the second curtain of the A7R blurs the exposure as it’s closing and that of the A7 other does not, which seems very unlikely.)
Further, Mike and I have shown that attaching a certain amount of weight to the camera can solve the problem completely. We are building 24-ounce weights (including the weight of a small, Arca-Swiss type screw-knob clamp, the L-plate and a metal block) to connect to the base of the camera when using longer lenses, especially when they are not native lenses with the camera connected directly to the tripod. I tested a 26-ounce weight, screwed to the bottom of the camera for horizontal exposures and found it highly effective. Mike tested a 24-ounce metal weight screwed directly to the base of the camera and it was highly effective for both horizontal and vertical camera position. If an L-plate such as the new one from Really Right Stuff, and a compact screw clamp are combined with a block of metal, the metal would need to weigh only about 17 ounces and can therefore be a piece of brass or stainless steel about 1 x 1.25 x 3″ long with simply a hole drilled through the middle in the short direction, or drilled through, up to a quarter inch behind the middle, because the shutter is about 1/4″ ahead of the tripod screw hole of the camera and moving the bar forward a bit would center it right beneath the shutter for optimal effect. Such a piece of stainless will weigh about 17 oz, so combined with the L-plate and clamp, the total is 24 ounces. A piece of brass would, depending on the alloy chosen, probably weight 1 or 2 ounces more. 13 ounces doesn’t work very well at all. We have not tried a series of several different weights, owing to the inconvenience of performing such tests, but a total weight of 24 ounces is looking at least close to ideal
I suspect that when the Sony G 70-200 f4 OSS lens appears, we will find that even at 200mm on a tripod, it is little affected by this malady, because the shake is well prevented by the Arca-Swiss style clamp on the tripod head with the camera directly connected via the base of an L-plate to the tripod. When mounting the same lens on its tripod foot for better weight balance and less strain on the lens mount (the 70-200 lens is only 840 grams so it’s not too heavy to mount directly and have the camera support it), the vibration issue is very likely to be worse, and may show motion at speeds close to 1/100th, especially when closer to 200 mm, or they may not be bad enough to notice. We’ll see.
But Sony needs to address this critical issue, which is preventing many uses of the camera from allowing us to get sharp pictures, except by using the dead weight. Notice that of all the samples published on the web, there have been few, if any, longer lens captures, and the method of connection to the tripod and use of adapters can have a big impact on the result.
In no case have I seen motion at focal lengths of 85 mm and below, even when adapting the lens to the camera and supporting the assembly by the adapter’s foot. Native lenses may be fairly safe from obvious movement out to 150mm when the camera is mounted directly to the tripod, at all shutter speeds, horizontal or vertical camera, but only testing them will tell. Vertical is apt to be worse, however.
We very much hope that Sony changes the firmware so as to allow an option to introduce a delay between the closing of the first curtain and the opening of the first curtain, to begin the exposure. It would appear that this delay would be very effective at diminishing the additional effect of the first motion of the first curtain to nearly nothing if it is only as long as 1/10th of a second, and would be a substantial improvement if it were even a delay of just 1/40th of a second, as evidence shows that this vibration is dampened very quickly. Or they could, with a new soft shutter option, require a double push of a remote to trip the shutter in this special mode. About half the vibration would remain, but it would be a big help to reduce it by half.
Leica did provide a special solution, something very much like this with the M240, I gather. It is certainly unfortunate that we didn’t get an electronic first curtain option with the A7R, and it remains mysterious why it didn’t happen. Hopefully a follow on camera will not omit this vital feature for tripod work with a very light weight camera. But in the meantime a modest firmware update could solve the problem ABOUT half way and help a lot. All of my tripod-shooting photographer friends care about this issue a great deal. The whole point of the camera is defeated if its fine detail is ruined by shutter shake.
Here are two examples made by Mike (100% sections). The first is the Nikkor 70-200 f4 VR lens at 1/100th and 800 ISO at 180 mm, the A7R turned vertical, and the lens connected to a sturdy tripod via the lens’ foot. The second is with the 24-ounce brass weight screwed directly into the tripod hole of the camera (no L-plate or clamp). These results (the one with the shake) are typical of what all three of us are seeing. Shorter lenses are better, longer are worse. And this lens, if the camera+lens had been mounted directly to the tripod, might have given a fine result, or a least a much less damaged result.
When the camera is hanging out on the end of the camera-lens mass, it is very readily moved by small forces!
Addendum:
As an addendum to my letter about the shutter vibration issue, I wanted to mention that my friend Mike and I have discussed what would be an optimal solution for Sony to allow the two movements of the first curtain to be separated in time, so as to cut vibrations during the exposure by roughly half.
After considering various options, we prefer a mode which would work exactly like a conventional MUP (mirror up) mode. When this “Delayed Shutter” mode is enabled, the first press of the shutter release (on a remote or on the camera) would cause the first shutter curtain to close, ending live view. The second press would then begin the exposure sequence by opening the first curtain, which is then followed by the second curtain closing, then re-opening to again begin live view.
I think we would find that even with a shutter speed of 1/100th of a second and the camera turned to vertical (portrait) position, that a delay between the two presses of as little as 1/4 second would still achieve the full benefit of the Delayed Shutter mode. Click, click. Simple, fast, and familiar to all of us tripod users. This would still be faster than the traditional process, where we wait 2 to 6 seconds after mirror up for the camera to calm down before starting an exposure where fine detail matters a lot. This approach, rather than inserting a fixed delay, would also allow us to choose precisely when we want the exposure to begin, which is important in many cases. It just wears out the shutter button on the remote twice as fast, along with the battery of a wireless remote. 🙂 Fully sharp results with longer lenses may still require the use of a dead weight as described, but only testing will tell. The weight seems to be highly effective, but cameras can wiggle lots of different ways and some setups may not even work just right with the weight at some shutter speeds, after a firmware fix. I sure hope they do as I really like this camera. I’ve been waiting a very long time for a camera that can do what it does
Regards,
Joseph Holmes
Kensington, California
Without the dead weight, camera vertical, so shake is left-right:
With the weight attached, everything else the same:
Editor’s note: This is a SAR readers article. Submit your articles at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com if you want them to be posted here. Thanks!
168 Responses
Thank you for the insight. I feared as much and it seemed obvious that the shutter would create such an issue. The photos I have taken so far on the tripod have been with the 35mm FE and in the range of seconds and have given great results. Just looking at the leveling tool when the shutter goes off indicates that the camera shakes. This is where Sony will shine or fail as I see it in addressing the issue. Thanks again for the notes.
+1, good job by the testers and SAR for publishing it. This is really useful info.
It’s been said before. But it’s very likely the reason the A7r has slower xsync speed (1/160 versus 1/250 in the A7) is to slow the shutter speed down (with a smaller slit) to reduce vibration levels to an acceptable level.
A7 is the superior camera, in every respect except MP.
But its sensor scored higher for DXO test. AFAIK, DXO test cares more aspects than just MP. The proper conclusion should be “A7 is the superior camera, in every respect except for the sensor”.
maybe without the aa filter the A7 would be the superior camera except for the mp
No it’s not. Try a heavy crop a serious enlargement. Speak for yourself please.
Some might say use the right lens for the job, or move your feet (when possible) and cropping isn’t an issue. Cropping reduced image quality from what the camera is designed to deliver with the right lens. I realize not everyone looks at it that way, but if you’re going to crop like that just get an APS-C sensor camera.
Here’s our dual-camera solution to the shutter shake, and it also allows us to shoot stills at the same time as video: http://45surfer.wordpress.com
Note how the curved bracket acts as a stabilizing camera grip too in the lower part of the figure:
http://herosjourney.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/2014-45surfer.jpg?w=650
Hello! Just wanted to clarify that I never actually witnessed the shutter shake. But I always shoot with the 45surfer brakcet and video camera below the main camera I use for stills as pictured throughout all the photos here: http://45surfer.wordpress.com . I am actually grateful for the miniaturization of the 36mp stills camera, as my former setup, also shown at my blog, utilized the Nikon D800E with the 70-200mm F/2.8 VR2 lens, plus the bracket, plus the bottom video camera, plus the flash. Yes! It was a workout, and shooting two 3.5 hour shoots on the beach with the Nikon D800E/70-200mm VR2 setup has given me football-player shoulders. 🙂 The far-lighter Sony A7R configuration makes it very light, yet I guess the extra weight of the bracket and lower camera also provide stabilization which makes the bracket a good thing for stabilizing the stills of the A7R too.
Anyone else try something like this? I noticed that the original blog above is suggesting machining and mounting weights, which my setup alleviates the need for, while also providing video. How heavy are those weights in the original blog going to be?
Best,
Dr. E 🙂
I should add that my very first shoots have turned out fine! No shutter shake here:
I have shot a lot of swimsuit models with the camera out here in Malibu, so if anyone enjoys swimsuit models, here is a socal lifestyle swimsuit/surfline photoshoot with the A7R & the 35mm F/2.8 Carl Zeiss lens.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/herosjourneymythology45surf/sets/72157638624916726/ (very first shoot with the A7r! drove to the beach, popped the 35mm F/2.8 lens on in my car (to keep sand out), and started shooting a few minutes later!)
And here is a socal lifestyle swimsuit/surfline photoshoot with the A7R & the 55mm F/1.8 Carl Zeis lens on a foggy/misty January Malibu day just last Thursday:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/herosjourneymythology45surf/sets/72157639631698935/
(Very pretty! She’s on the new Baywatch TV Show called SAF3!)
Well, you may have missed it, but the talk here is not about exposure times of 1/500s and similar (or even faster), but for example the 1/100s used in the example picture.
I find this issue a deal breaker for me. I suppose that I am not the only one who wants to use tele lenses. I hope Sony will react.
As long as the lens weight is not more the 1kg, I would have no doubt to mount the camera itself on the tripod head. The A7Rs mount is strenghened with a magnesium alloy plate.
I have been following the thread over at getdpi about the shutter vibration issues. I hope Sony doesn’t ignore the issue for too long.
They’ll ignore it till a next model is released with hardware fix.
It’s Sony’s way, do not fix anything. Go on to the next model.
I certainly hope so. That will give me the opportunity to pick up an ‘old’ model cheap.
This is interesting and I was wondering if you had perhaps taken any images with the additional battery pack attached, I was wondering if that would in effect act as a weight stabilizer ?
Thanks for your work on this
I haven’t gotten the battery grip yet..I thought the same thing. The grip is obviously more than 25 oz. I’m interested to hear more on this for sure too.
Yes, this. If the battery grip is enough to stop the shake, then many shooters won’t be affected.
For that matter, I’ll pour a lead battery mold, coat it in Plasti-Dip, and pop it into one of the battery slots. At ~12oz/tablespoon, that should add at least 40oz to the weight.
Well, the same issue that DSLR got, only different cause of it.
I’ll stay with SLT – seems like it’s a perfect balance of stability, noise, and relaibility. Never got even half of the issues with it as these new cameras got. Cant’t use WA because of color shifts, can’t use tele because of shutter mixed with too small body…. Seems like the longer we wait the RX1 becomes more and more attractive camera for travel photography!
99% of all WA out the should be fine. only rf lenses shows issues afaik. and a7 causes no shutter blur. neither does a7r with a weight. the grip should do the job (let’s wait and see). but there are other good reasons to stay with slt. such as ibis!
In my experience the SLT cameras suffer from the same problem when the electronic first curtain is not engaged. When using longer telephoto lenses, I have encountered similar blurring of the image with the mechanical first shutter curtain. What I have not done is try to analyze the critical shutter speeds at which the effect occurs. Given that the A7R lacks an electronic first curtain to solve the problem, one solution may be for people to trigger the shutter on the camera, rather than using a cable release. The act of holding the camera would probably dampen the vibration from the shutter. The problem is that this requires good technique, and likely will not work as well at slower shutter speeds. However, at the critical 1/100 speed mentioned in the article, I suspect that it is a viable solution when done carefully.
Never had all these issues with my old Minolta 7D, A900 or A99.
If images were blurred it was because of a too long exposure time with long lenses: motion coming from my position not perfectly stable.
They never ever came from shutters’ movements.
…rewind, I just read the specs on the battery grip Nd it is specified at 8.8 oz.
Then the batteries add some 4.2oz more. And then the configuration and rigidity of construction play their roles too.
So it deserves checking out. May work, may not…
It would be fairly trivial to create a lead battery mold and coat it with plasti-dip. Pop that into the grip in place of one of the batteries and you’re looking at ~12oz/tablespoon of lead. I don’t know off-hand the volume of a battery, but I expect it would be enough to make the difference.
For some this is very important, but overall this is a cornercase, so — maybe one should just simply offer a mountable lead pack on Amazon? I mean this seriously.
For the next model, Sony should construct the shutter in a way that a counterbalancing weight moves in the opposite direction.
I hope they will not make the camera heavier to prevent shock.. hahaha.
I have been using the A7r handheld for quite a bit lately and looking back at my overall use of cameras this seems to be a niche use. I seldom use large lenses on these small wonder cameras and I almost never see others do that. Leicas don’t support well lenses over 135 mm so I don’t think this is a big issue for these kinds of cameras. Still Sony should address this since it is an expensive camera.
And as sad as it is . It does not only appear with long lenses. Lloyd Chambers could proof shutter vibrations with the new Zeiss 55 1.8 Sonnar as well. Leaves me a little clueless. What if my best pictures are unusable due to bluer?
Fritz, I did read the article and I can only say that my Voigtländer 50 mm performs flawlessly in the studio. The sharpness and details are awesome. Lloyd does something with the 55 mm that I haven’t experienced. I have taken a studio shot revealing the details here : http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3581626
Due to the extremele short firing time of a studio flash I would not expect this to be an issue.
So far I have shot with my 58mm f 1.2 Rokkor and no issues, same with 24mm F2.8. Today I set up the Rokkor 200 F3.5, no issues, these have all been mounted with an adaptor and the camera is set up as the tripod interface. I shot the e mount 18-200 hand held and no issues. I have some more to test but let me redo the 200 using the battery pack and use the adaptor mount with the tripod interface of the adaptor mounted to the tripod. I will shoot slow and and at 100 and let you know my findings
It depends more on an exposure time than focal lenght, or lens – though these certainly are a factor too (older heavy metal lenses are less prone to vibrations than modern lenses).
Antennagate – A7r is a fantastic camera. But will stay to Canon on long tele. That was a bit sad though?
Ment to write SHUTTERGate 🙁
It may matter to some people at certain times of the day or times of the year – you will have to judge this for yourself. Personally it will make no difference.I am shooting slower or rather faster.
I am also using the VG-C1EM battery grip and the LA-EA4 adapter.Also have the CLM-55 5 inch monitor. Plus I own a monopod, 2 metal and 1 carbon fibre tripods and 5 different heads. As you can see I don’t believe one size fits all.
I accept the reports as valid but I am also concerned at the number of Chicken Little’s who are jumping on the bandwagon. After all is this any worse than having to use MLU on a SLR ?
Yes, it is worse than MLU. DSLRs got a design and weight to neglate shutter vibrations, some even got EFL (Canon or Sony). Mirrorless are just too small with shutter too close to lens to migrate this issue so easily – and Full Frame shutter creates an enormous vibrations comparing to tiny shutter of m4/3 cameras, what only makes the situation worse (that’s also a reason why A7(r) is so loud)
so far the problem of such a scale (noticeable on the real picture, not per-pixel level sounds incredible! I mean: IN credible.
It could have an explanation in the hand vibration of the experimenters or so.
To clearly detect or reject the issue, there better be the following experiment done: to make a comparison of the two shots of the same target from the same distance using same lens:
1) in the very or totally dark room make a shot by camera on tripod, using long exposure (say, 10 sec) and within it make a main exposure using the external flash, mounted not on the camera, ignited manually. so not moveable pars are involved while making exposure.
2) camera is put on the surface, which allows it to move, for example, on the pillow. and make the shot using IR remote.
then compare the per-pixel level photos.
Tape a laser pointer on top of the A7R. Point the red dot onto a wall more than 10 feet away. Trigger the shutter with self timer or remote. You should able to see how the red dot jumps.
At least with the Nikon D600 on every shutter actuation you are fortunate enough to strike oil.
😉
That’s why they released D610.
Yah
Maybe Sony will soon release the A710/A710R
I use D600 one year ago and there is not any oil spotting.
Why A7R does not have e-first curtain? A7 does and I did not observe any shake problem.
LOL…
LOL ha, ha, ha, ha LOL
Actually, i already encoutered this problem on my old NEX-5. I had a 500mm F8 catadioptric, and I tried it on the camera with a tripod once ; despite the good quality of the lens, all my photos came with this kind of “shaking effect”. At first, i couldn’t explain it, and then, i supposed it was because of the shutter movement, because i also noticed afterwards the same problem with my 180mm F2.8. (With a smaller shaking effect… randomly between 1 and 3 pixels)
Everything got confirmation when i tried the same lenses on a friend’s NEX3C with the electronic first shutter, because no shaking was noticeable at all, and the quality of the image was as it should have been.
So until I buy a camera with electronic first shutter ( which should happen soon 😉 ) i can only use those two lenses without tripod, holding the camera with the right hand and the lens in the left, it gives good results, but with those long focal ranges, it is such a nonsense 😉
I didn’t try the attached weight, i should !
With the 36 Mpixels of the A7R ( compared to the 14 of the NEX5 ), no doubt that the effect is much more important… however, i thought that the body’s weight, size, and strength compare to my NEX5 should have solved the problem. It seems not…
R&D are more than busy inventing and implementing a working global shutter :-)NO more moving parts in a camera. Oh wait, we would like to have XYZ-axis sensor movement…
+1 for the global shutter.
Has Sony made any comments yet ? It may not be a deal breaker for people using shorter focal length lenses though.
Has anyone repeated the test with the add-on battery grip? That will add extra mass.
Don
Has the competition unleashed the FUD creators?
Yesterday we had compression artifacts.
Today we hear about shutter vibration.
What percentage of images is really affected?
Why don’t they just turn on electronic first curtain?
AFAIK, the A7r doesn’t have that electronic-first-curtain shutter mode.
Was the OSS turned OFF or ON to see what effect this might have?
Nobody cares about this problem. It’s like a piece of cake. In fact, I guess it may be user error too!
well I guess just about the same amount of people care about it as care about mirror vibration on dslrs, and it is just as much user error as blur from mirror vibration.
Get a life.
Mmmh… What is vibrating ? the sensor due to vibration or the body (because he is too light…)?
If this is the body, adding weight to the tripod solves the issue. THis is physics…
If the sensor was moving, it would be the real issue.
+1 ! Indeed it is fundamental physics. If the shutter cinematic energy is insufficiently dampened at the end of its travel to transform most of its energy in heat then the cinematic energy will lead to a displacement of the camera body / lens assembly. This would be leading to the observed blur as the assembly would move either including the tripod or the assembly would rotate around its achoring point assuming the tripod does not move at all. In any case any residual energy would dissipate by the path of least resistance in this case causing camera / lens / tripod assembly shake. I imagine that a material is used to dampen the shutter at the end of its travel but it may have a different absorption efficiency across the range of energies produced over the camera shutter speeds. This could explain why the phenomena is not observed at all shutter speeds.
The sensor IS moving.
Theoretically, the new “Camera Shake Reduction” feature in Photoshop CC should fix this up anyway.
lol because the proper fix isn’t fixing the problem. Yeah thats the right way. (sigh)
The problem only occurs with telephoto lens and tripod? Freehand is not it?
“the worst blur usually occurring at 1/100th of a second (strangely)” why strangely?
it’s the same with mirror vibration, the vibration is over after a short time so the most light hits the sensor when nothing moves anymore.
and I think the d800 sensor (which the a7r uses, maybe with different micro lenses) doesn’t allow for an electronic first curtain. so it is not an omission by sony it is just not possible with that sensor. that is just my guess (or does the D800 have this feature?)
so I think it is not a deal breaker but it is good to know, and the proposed solution that works like a classic mirror up could and should be implemented via firmware update.
I don’t think Nikon has implemented this feature on its DSLR, only Canon.
Nice try! every camera can have problems, but this one is not. In fact, this is normal operation and a higher risk when using long-focal length.
Interesting read:
http://beforethecoffee.com/sony-a7r-vibration-comparison-with-nikon-d3-and-sony-nex-7/
So, basically… Sony has a super serious, devastating issue with uder technique at a very narrow range of shutter speeds for a given long telephoto focal length that can be easily overcome.
HUGE STORY!
This is known as a ROOKIE MISTAKE and Panasonic has made it as well a few years ago with the old GX1 and certain X lenses. The combination of very light body and shutter slap with certain lenses would give you a guaranteed blurry image.
While many consider Nikon and Canon to be dinosaurs, they’ve learned a lot over the years and exposure delay are standard features just in case vibration in certain situations is an issue.
Olympus mFT bodies suffer from this effect , there are a multitude of threads about it on the various forums.
What does shutter delay do? As far as I know, it delays the shutter mechanism from making exposure for a certain period of time after the mirror’s lifted up. It may be useful for eliminating mirror slap vibration, but less useful in shutter vibration problem. Electronic first shutter is the best solution so far.
This is not a surprise to me at all. I tried early on to find out which of the A7s had an electronic first curtain shutter, and which one didn’t. This is because in my macro photography I’d count EFC as essential. Without it, long lens or high magnification macro shots around a certain shutter speed have a random blurring tendency.
I’ve have known about shutter shock for a very long time. In fact I changed systems over 30 years ago because of it. I used to have a Pentax 35mm film system including a Pentax MX SLR. Even with the mirror locked up you could feel the shutter vibration. I changed to an Olympus OM system and OM-1 after doing a side by side test. If you locked up the mirror on the Pentax MX balanced a coin on it and fired the shutter via the self-timer the coin would fly off. Whereas on the OM-1 it stayed standing.
When I got a Canon 40D which has electronic first curtain shutter it was a revelation. There is no doubt in my mind that EFC or some other type of electronic shutter is the way to go.
I suspect this problem has gone unacknowledged for so long because with film it was difficult to test and see this effect. You would just be aware that there would random unexplained blur.
SteB, memories can change over 30 years. I’ve had four MXs over the years, two of them still here and in occasional use. Not one of them has a mirror lock. Perhaps you mean the Pentax LX, which had mirror lock and also a more vibration prone vertically running metal shutter; I’m sure the OM-1 would have been smoother. Pentax had a damper system on the MX mirror along with the smoother horizontal cloth shutter that resulted in an exceptionally smooth mirror/shutter movement which was unequaled. Try the “head test” with the shutter on B.
Sad confirmation of my #1 fear with the A7R. I’m a bird photographer and shoot 300mm and 500mm a lot – mostly hand held (Nikon on NEX-7). The small, light camera on huge lens works very well, and I’ve always believed electronic first curtain is a critical ingredient in getting sharp results. I know article claims hand holding has less or no issue, but the vibration is there and tests were with much shorter lenses than I use. The proposed fixes are unwelcome – delay in particular is unworkable for my flighty subjects.
The pixel pitch of the A7R is much preferred vs. A7 for capturing fine feather detail. So I’ll be waiting for elec. front curtain, at least for FF. Maybe the nex7 successor will have a compelling new feature like in camera stabilization. Otherwise it looks like I’ll be using my nex7 for a long time to come….
By the time you get to 500mm the mass of the rig is so big that the shutter is inconsequential. you won’t see any more shutter induced vibration on a 500 f/4 with an A7R than you would with a DSLR. I’ve actually done the vibration analysis tests on this. There is simply too much mass for the shutter alone to move things very much. Mirror slap on the DSLR is a much bigger factor than the shutter movement on the A7R. The problem here is mass related, more mass less problem. short wide angle lenses don’t see it due to a lack of magnification. I think lack of active AF on a lens this big would be a much bigger concern for birds or wildlife then shutter vibration.
What I meant to say is that the A7R’s shutter isn’t any more consequential than a DSLRs shutter plus mirror slap in the situation of a super tele. What I wrote above didn’t come out right and could be misinterpreted. Obviously any long telephoto is very sensitive to vibration but my point was that the shutter is such a small part of the total mass on a rig like this that you won’t notice a difference between an A7R and a DSLR.
Shooting a 300mm – 500mm lens you will be at 1/300 to 1/500 which is miles away from the identified 1/100sec problem area anyway
Unfortunately, depending on the lens you are using, the problem can show itself even at 1/1000 s – happened to me on LZOS 750mm f/6 Apo with field flattener – which in the end was a deal breaker for me, I returned the A7R and got an A7 plus an additional NEX-7 body in exchange – electronic first shutter on both simply removed the problem, and the resolution gap is filled by the NEX-7…
Is it such a BIG issue that the camera is not worth buying ? I dont think so.
I doubt that the same happens when holding the camera by hands as two hands = 2 points of anchorage. Now the photographer may be shaky himself that is something else.
Some extra precautions will be required when using long telephoto lenses & tripod at 1/100s such as to avoid the shake.
Shooting a 300mm – 500mm lens you will be at 1/300 to 1/500 which is miles away from the identified 1/100sec problem area anyway
Clesrly sony has overlooked long lens users with thier E mount system.
Not only are they not making many long and macro lenses for E mount but we need to use adapters that do not allow full funtion with A mount lenses.
Not only do we not have image stabilization but now the camera introduces camera shake even when we put the camera on a sturdy tripod.
E mount is just not yet ready for the the photographer who needs versatility.
It is only made for wide angle and 55mm shooters.
Image stabilization does not help with this phenomenon , the Olympus E-M1/E-M5 with the best 5-AXIS IS currently available suffer from the same problem.
These smaller mirrorless bodies are simply not the best tool for the job for anyone using long high quality telephoto lenses.Many of the subjects of long telephoto lenses be it birds in flight or fast moving sports,benefit greatly from high quality C-AF & tracking which no mirrorless body to date offers. My E-M1 is a wonderful camera in many aspects C-AF & Tracking are sadly not amongst them [ compared to DSLRs of similar price]. Even with the better EVF of the E-M1 which is I believe the same as the A7/R, I feel it is compromised in fast panning {following a moving target} compared to OVF. Though despite being a fan of OVF , i must admit to often missing the utility of an EVF
It is unfortunate for a Sony nature shooter like yourself,I have never used a Sony DSLR and as such never gave the lack of in lens IS a thought,as a mainly Nikon shooter I can get lenses from 16mm-1200mm {1800mm in DX mode}.
As an animal photographer and an A mount user I have never been tempted by E mount…
It offer few if any advantages and many disadvantages.
Perhaps the hybrid mount will make the system usable for us.
For the future would like…
A or hybrid c size with 24mp x 3 layer stacked sensor…
Or 54mp x 3 layer stacked ff sensor
For the short term while waiting for stacked an inexpensive 36mp c camera would be nice.
This is exactly why I’m holding onto my 7D – for bird and wildlife photography. I’ve been enjoying my a7r so far, and it will make a great companion to the 7D, but it (and I don’t think any mirrorless) is in no way a replacement for the 7D for a birding situation. Even though the IQ isn’t great over 640 for birds, the AF is amazing and it’s a well-balanced tool when using big teles.
I got unsharp pictures with the E-M1 at 12mm f/5.6 1/200s. Sold the camera immediately. Now someone else has to deal with it. A camera should deliver sharp images using correct technique.
who needs IBIS?
everyone using these has perfect lighting every single shot
everyone using these has perfectly motionless subjects every single shot
no sale Sony
better luck with your next consumer experiment
The entire photography world functioned before IBIS. Please. Stop pretending that somehow it’s a critical function, without which a maera cannot have value.
Also – what magical IBIS are you using that stops subjects from moving?
This whole issue is ridiculously overblown. I’m using a 180mm f/2.8 HEAVY AS HELL macro prime and with just a tiny TINY bit of technique, get exactly what I want. Actually, you have to work very hard to see the effect of the shutter.
Complainers gonna complain.
I want that IBIS system, you know the one that stops moving subjects… :rollingeyes:
“”who needs IBIS?””
People who shoot static subjects in low light for it does not help with moving subjects and away from low light it is not needed.
“”Everyone using these has perfect lighting every single shot”
Have a look through any major photo sharing website.You will see that even from high end gear or cameras with IS in body. Nearly all shots are taken in either good enough light ,with flash or for long exposure shots using tripods, monopods , beanbags or whatever.
“everyone using these has perfectly motionless subjects every single shot”
They better have for image stabilization does nothing for motion blur.
The shutter’s vibration isn’t just a problem with long lenses. It also wreaks havoc with adapted Canon lens with image stabilization. On my A7r+Canon 35mm f/2 IS I see vibration-induced blur whenever IS is enabled for shutter speeds between 1/40 through 1/200. Here is an example: I took 8 shots, 4 with IS enabled and then 4 with IS disabled, all with focus locked:
http://horshack.smugmug.com/photos/i-BSmN9Nw/0/O/i-BSmN9Nw.jpg
I’m guessing the vibration is reaching the lens and triggering its IS system to counteract as if it were human motion. However since the shutter/exposure sequence is so quick the IS is still in transition when the exposure starts. Since this problem affects hand-held operation I don’t want Sony to implement the proposed anti-shock feature as an MLUP – I think it should be implemented the same way Olympus does on the OM-D, as a configurable delay between the 2nd shutter curtain closing (which is done to block-off the sensor for reset) and the 1st shutter curtain opening to start the exposure.
With a shutter speed double the reciprocal focal length of the lens { 1/80th for a 35mm }. Would IS off not be expected to give better results , with my E-M1 I have IS off by default and only use it in specific conditions.
Despite is almost god like status amongst its fans image stabilization can have as many issues as advantages if not used properly.This is easy to see ,take a high detail shot with IS on even well in its useful range, now take one with a tripod the difference in image quality is the downside of IS.
Unfortunately for me the 1/40 through 1/200 is a range I would often be shooting at , the range where longer lenses >100mm -200mm would benefit most above 1/200th IS IS not needed.Below 1/40th your subject is obviously not moving and I would prefer to use some form of external support { though there are a few scenarios where this is not possible}
A properly functioning IS system works equally well with IS ON or OFF for multiples of the focal length reciprocal. In fact Canon has suggested in the past to leave IS enabled even for fast-paced action shooting (with very high shutter speeds) to help its AF system keep a target stable for tracking focus.
Update…I just tried an experiment similar to Joseph’s. Instead of weighting the camera on the bottom I instead mounted a Yongnuo YN-560 II flash with 4 AA batteries to the hotshoe, which adds exactly 1 pound according to my mail scale. I then repeated the Canon 35mm f/2 IS experiment I previously did here.
Here are the results. I took 3 photos for each and selected the sharpest.
http://horshack.smugmug.com/photos/i-Crxqtvz/0/O/i-Crxqtvz.jpg
Just tried it with my Canon 400mm f5.6 on a tripod, 1/100 second, with and without a weight at the camera (Metabones version 3 adapter). The combination is mounted to the tripod using the Lens’ tripod mount. This lens has no IS.
The good news is that I could not detect any difference between with and without weight and both looked very sharp at 100%
Perhaps the lens is so heavy that it dampens the vibration even when the camera body is out at the end of the back of the lens (about 5″ behind the mount).
I struggled with this issue using long vintage glass on Olympus MFT. Just like “mirror slap” on DSLR it is hardly a “defect”. I am surprised Sony doesn’t have an “anti-shake” option like Olympus but for me the thing that was most helpful for telephoto (and Macro) was this Manfrotto mount …. probably because it adds weight and prevents “swinging” effect.
http://www.manfrotto.us/telephoto-lens-support
The other thing is that some shutter speeds seem to cause worse problems than others depending on lens camera combination and they are best avoided.
Had thought the same myself. Will have it pick one up and try it out. Has anyone else tried using this long lens support to see if it helps?
24 oz… So I guess the heavy weight of larger cameras is a feature?
All important items to me also,
I rented the A7 and I could not get the the flash to synch at 1/250th it was 1/200th.
useable but I would prefer the specified 1/250th. just a not here on comparing the A7 to my A850, the A7 with my CZ 16-35 was a tiny fraction sharper, real tiny.
The A7 may score a bit higher on sharpness if they came out with a version without an aa filter. I wanted 36mp for sure like a lot of people, but this new problem and the slow synch are fairly big issues for me.
Good thing they made the camera smaller and lighter…to make up for the weight you now need to add!……. 🙂
Meanwhile aptiently waiting and still shooting with my A850
It would be nice if Sony could implement a firmware fix. However, here is the *REAL* problem as I see it:
– From the get-go, it was clear that Sony developed two different cameras for two different purposes. The A7r was clearly intended to be a studio camera, and the A7 was designed to be the more well-rounded, multi-use camera.
– Marketing, reviewers, and enthusiasts became enthralled with, even fixated on, the “Amazing 36MP Sensor!” of the of the 7r (in ‘such a small package!’), and soon many people began to think of it as the better camera irregardless of design and intent.
– People bought the more expensive camera with the ‘flagship’ designation, more MPs, and multiple ‘camera of the year’ awards thinking they simply couldn’t go wrong with what was the ‘apple of my eye’ for so many reviewers’
– Only to find that they bought a studio camera… to use as nature/sports/events camera.
The right tool for the right job yields better results. It doesn’t mean the A7r *can’t* be used for other purposes… but I think it’s fair to expect that the A7 will work better in some cases, and that you may need to use ‘work-arounds’ with the A7r.
Am I being to harsh??
Not at all, consumers should understand that a truck will perform better in some situations and a sport car will perform better in some situations. The problem may be that Sony made them look identical. If you see two computer models – identical-looking but one with a 2ghz processor and one with a 3 .6 ghz processor one expects the latter to do everything that the former can do but faster. It is the job of Sony and re-sellers to educate the consumer as to which model is suited to which tasks.
I have no expectation that Sony will acknowledge or alleviate the problem through software options just as they have ignored the defective f60 flash.
Amen!
This what happens when you don’t design everything at the same time.
This is Good for the Alpha
Sony should of kept the Nex system as intended.
1) I know and most should know that there are non-Sony trolls who frequent sites such as this solely to exaggerate any anomaly to deter potential camera buyer from choosing a Sony-branded camera.
2) I know several who are currently using the A7 and A7r who have no such problem as described in the video and throughout the article and comments. The photos that I have seen are both handheld and off a tripod, and are tack sharp with the kit, Ziess, and adapter fitted lenses from several other manufacturer with and without image stabilization.
3) For those who are not trolls here to support another camera manufacturer and proclaim to have a problem with “shutter shake”, maybe You just suck at photography and that is why Your photos suck.
Note: the “video” was one of several that I watched elsewhere.
Well stated. This sounds like Ken Rockwell once again. That is that this is a bad camera because it does not work perfectly with non-native camera lens. Is it a problem with Sony and Zeiss FE lenses? Well, of course we don’t know because the longer focal lenses have not been released. I know that there are a lot of people who want a camera where you can use every lens from every camera manufacturer. When that doesn’t happen, Sony gets the blame for some reason. A good professional photographer will have multiple bodies for different situations because there is no one camera that is perfect for every assignment. I am disappointed in the administrator of this site that he devotes so much space to this article when he could have provided a link as he had done in the past.
This IS a camera that is INTENDED TO. BE USEABLE WITH ALL LENSES.
What we have is a system ONLY SUITED FOR SHORT E MOUNT CANON AND NIKON LENSES. For this purpose this camera is highly successfull.
Of course you can fix this lighttwieght pocket camera a litle by attaching a 24 oz wieght to it.
We measure quality by how a product fulfills its intended function.
Based on any use other than short non a- mount lenses this camera is less than successfull.
The A7r and A7 were NOT intended for use with all camera lenses. It was INTENDED to be a compact systems camera with an electronic viewfinder and have a full frame sensor. Because of its form factor, a person CAN use lenses from other manufacturers. Maybe you have been snake bit by the subject of some of your photographs, but Sony is not going to do R&
D to make Canon, Nikon, and Leica users happy. Is there some official statement from Sony saying that this is what they INTENDED to do? I will literally eat my words (one point font) if you can show me that this is Sony’s intention.
I dont think anyone really understands sonys intentions…and todays avataar is a Leopard Gecko head …not a snake.
Sony condones the use of adapters and 3rd party lenses. Last Summer, Sony even subsidized a Metabones Speedbooster by way of a rebate for buyers of the FS100 / FS700 e-mount cameras.
Also, for now there are few native options and no telephoto lenses so it’s only natural that people will adapt.
I disagree, this is valuable information for someone considering this camera and putting up an actual article that has been independently verified by other users is helpful. A long lens shooter deciding between the a7 & a7r will find this particularly of value. Additionally, this site gains credibility by not merely pushing puff pieces and Sony praise.
Personally, I’ve been on the fence about getting one and this gives me issue to pause for now. I may wait until the 70-200/f4 arrives and see if it suffers from vibration blur.
+1
It’s interesting how people wished for a FF mirrorless a few months/years back but when Sony finally releases it, it’s not good enough. The A7/r is a solid performance camera with a few problems just as other cameras are (though it’ll be interesting to see if the future FE 70-200 f4 will have this problem on the A7r or not). I bet if it was Nikon or Canon whom releases these cameras it’ll be full of praises regardless of its shortcomings like how I didn’t get why the Nikon Df is not getting lots of flak for its none improvement or even a focusing screen for manual lenses considering they promote how you can use your Pre-AI lenses!
Back in the days of film we used the analog approach to handle problems like this. We didn’t demand that the manufacturer provide us with a software update. One, use a bean bag over the camera or lens. Two,I believe that even today, some tripod makers allow you suspend your camera bag from the tripod to stabilize your set-up. Can anyone think outside the box anymore?
I agree.
Guess what? Shutter shock has ALWAYS been with us but when we were using film it was a bit harder to detect because most people did not make large prints.
Today, no one prints but they zoom in to 800% and will note all sorts of image defects.
Yes it does exist. But as Wheelus notes, we can get off our own backsides and solve the problem without whining about useless manufacturers.
I guess this will be the ‘issue” of 2014 now that resolution, DR, micro lenses , and fast prime fashions have run their course.
Remember when the big issue was “my camera back focuses!”?
What whine fashion will be next?
“What whine fashion will be next?”
I would bet the next big whine thing will be,whining about folk whining about folk whining 🙂
+100 !!! I genuinely like that statement:
Shutter shock has ALWAYS been with us but when we were using film it was a bit harder to detect because most people did not make large prints.
Today, no one prints but they zoom in to 800% and will note all sorts of image defects.
Excellent !!!
I don’t think they can. There are so many more issues other than the camera here. We used to us a Magic arm with out 2 1/4″s which was easy to use and fast.
I AM a happy user and owner of a number of Sony mirror-less exchangeable lens cameras – current ‘collection’ contains an NEX-5N (IR-modified), a NEX-5R, three NEX-7 (one IR/Haplha modified) and one A-7 which replaced an A7R that I had bought first and returned after a few days because of the first shutter slap making its use impossible with my favorite long focal length lens (750 mm APO)… so I am certainly ‘sold’ on Sony’s mirror-less cameras.
Therefore please do not call people criticizing the real problem Sony-bashers -:
However, for the A7R the shutter slap will unfortunately remain a deal-breaker for me.
Tested with battery grip and i dont see any shake at all:)
So point 1 i never had a problem
Point two I couldnt recreate the problem using the battery grip 🙂
Fun stuff on what could have been a boring Sunday
just tried it with A7r and LA-AE3 adapter and Sony 70-300 G lens
Mount the tripod to the LA-AE3 and I see vibration blur.
Mount the tripod to the camera and I see sharp images.
So there is no issue for any lens except massive teles like a 300/2.8 or Sigma 50-500 where you can’t hang a lens off the camera.
Or just shoot at 1/focal length ans problem solved
WOW you are using a telephoto lens at 100th of a second and you have seen motion blur well me to!!!!! I saw it with a Minolta 80-200 at 320 sec shutter speed on my a99 .Also if this a new problem why do high end slrs have mirror lock up. Beats me I think this could be very subjective to your equipment. Sony are no mugs I don’t believe they would put a product out being flawed.
Unfortunately, no chance mounting my ‘long tube’ hanging off the camera in the way described by you – the OTA with focuser and camera adapter alone alone has a weight of ± 10 kg, mount adapter adds another 2..3. The vibration introduced by the A7R first shutter in the OTA can be felt by placing a hand on the OTA when firing the camera.
Maybe I could have constructed a rig holding the camera, too – but I rather decided to go along a known to be successful method – return the body and get an A7 which does not exhibit the problem…
This whole thing is being blown way out of proportion, the authors test looks worse than anything I’ve tried probably because of tripod foot on his lens. I’ve tested my 70-200 G at almost all shutter speeds and am seeing sharp images. The A7r is producing incredibly sharp images and is such a pleasure to carry around at the same time.
Yea totally.
I just tried out my Canon 70-300 L With metabones 3
Handheld, with IS, supersharp
Tripod (connected to camera rather than lens or adapter) and IS on or off – supersharp.
This issue is just cause by the resonance of the shutter movement when the camera is held by its mount rather than hand or tripod…
Easy to work around…
While I’m not a fan of the a7r I think this test is utter horse shit. Light camera, big lens? Do not use camera mount…not rockey science here.
This observation could be very useful. One solution I found for film cameras was to tripod mount the lens/camera on the tripod and cradle the camera body, as if one were handholding it. I had a problem with shutter induced blur–as well as mirror slip blur–being evident when using shutter speeds of 1/60 second to 1/125 second. Cradling the camera while it the lens was tripod mounted helped dampen the vibrations induced by the mechanical motion of the shutter and mirror.
Perhaps this would work for the a7R as well.
Brian Matsumoto
I’m surprised there have been no specifics about tripods in this discussion, and no attempt to distinguish motion of the tripod from give in the mount or flex of the tripod.
+1
Were the images taken with a remote release or on timer? I have found that even on a heavy tripod at speeds below 1/250 I can blur telephoto images (M240 & canon 6d) by using the shutter release by hand.
The future will probably be electronic shutters as it is always best to reduce the number of moving parts (like removing the moving mirror)
On solution may be to build a bracket that connects the body tripod mount to the lens tripod mount (monolithic solution)
If this is not worked out, high megapixel cameras are not any better than low megapixel cameras.
Exactly a bracket is the answer if Sony doesn’t come up with a solution. I’ve done all of my testing with a sturdy tripod and cable release. The point of dampening the cameras vibration with your hand or elbow is a good one and is worked many times in the past with the D800e. Like I said before I think this is a issue that needs to be addressed but is not monumental in any way. What I am seen from the A7r is a series of some of the most extraordinary images from any camera that I’ve ever seen. It seems that almost all classic optics and current Canon and Nikon lenses work superbly, not to mention the FE Zeiss lenses that are coming out. I feel confident that you probably could use any lens that was reasonable and sharp in the past with exceptional results on this camera. The wide angles that are doing some purple fringing things with the sensor are easily corrected with lightroom recover edges or capture one LLC. If you haven’t been to this link please take a look. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255248
Agree. Shutter Shock has always been a challenge, especially when the SLR format was accepted. A good rangefinder (eg Leica) was so smooth to avoid the problem completely.
For the A7R, when using legacy rangefinder lenses, I have encountered slight camera shock at 90mm and longer when handheld. Using a sturdy tripod and head, the problem is resolved. In fact, a good monopod can resolve the problem too. The shock problem arises when I want to use my massive, legacy SLR lenses. Over 200mm and shock is a factor. Anything less than a perfect adapter will cause shock for ANY SLR lens. Thus, I use DSLR for specific work such as sport, wildlife, micro, studio. The A7R is my carry everywhere, general camera, and the lens i use 99% of the time is the Zeiss Contax G2/45.
On the subject of legacy lenses, imho I find the A7R sensor to be extraordinary and only the best of best lenses can be used to show the potential of the sensor. But the issue is not brand per se, but rather lens design. The problem is compounded by those manufacturers who do not disclose their designs, so testing is trial and error (costly and time). Myself I have found only the Planar and Distagon designs will give perfect images: all other designs (Sonnar, Biogon, Tessar, and variations) will give aberrations (fringe, shifts). Only the Zeiss branded Planar and Distagon lenses work for me. Other legacy brands and designs, such as Leica, may be excellent/legendary on film but are not a good match for the A7R: you will need to fiddle with in-camera profiles and corrections, and then in post-pro. Of course, for black&white this is a non-issue. And for dedicated Zeiss lenses (eg Sonnar) the story is completely different.
I have found the combo of A7R with legacy Zeiss G45 lens to be a perfect match and the images are simply stunning. The IQ is very very close to the results from the Otus lens. For dedicated lens, to maximise all the camera functions, the Zeiss FE55 is stellar.
Another observation I have is the market prices for used lenses. Since the A7R has arrived, I see the price of all Zeiss Contax G lenses have nearly tripled in price from 2 years ago, to the point where they are now equal to original prices, and not so very much lower from new dedicated lenses! The same applies to other brands, especially legacy Zeiss, and the truly top lenses are now scarce. I wish now I bought a few of the rare Zeiss lenses I encountered previously!
This test was done with a Nikon to NEX adapter between the body and the lens, and therefore the test is worthless.
With a native lens the camera would probably be properly anchored.
Ther are no native long lenses so the test is totally valid.
Furthrrmore even when and if long E mount lenses do come out most people will still adapt long lenses from other mounts so they can still use the lenses on fullsize cameras.
What do you base this assumption on! If anything the camera is mounted more securely using the meta-bones adapter. Do you have an A7 and have you tested it?
You may not believe it but I can tell you from experience that both with Novoflex adapters and with Leitax replacement bayonets, the body-lens connection will be stiff and sturdy… as sturdy as any modern DSLR native lens mount…
With the A7, shutter shake is a non-issue, with the A7R, shutter shake can, even with native lenses, be fatal for the image quality. If it is not, and both lighting and lens play along, the A7R produces images of very high technical quality.
The oversmplified version…
If you primarily shoot long lenses, macro lenses, wildife or sports the E mount system is not a good choice..go with the A mount system……comparable A mount cameras will come out soon.
If you primarily shoot wide angle to normal with an ocasional portrait and would like a smaller lighter system….then the E mount system could be a good choice…you will also have the advantage of being able to use other system lenses but will not have ibis.
These are compelling important reasons to selct one or the other system based on your specific needs.
Hopefully sony will tie the two systems together in the future with a hybrd camera…but for now both systems have differrent strengths and weaknesses.
I think your assessment is oversimplified and should be reevaluated based on the current information. What you are saying is basically what digital Lloyd is saying and is flawed in many ways not the least of which is his desire to drive people to his site. Like I posted above I’ve and other people had no problems shooting with a 200mm lens when no shutter vibration. .
My oversimplified assessment is consistent with what I have been posting since the a77 and nex7 first came out..
It is based primarily on the E mouunts lack of compatability with A mount lenses and lack of available native long and macro lenses.
This situation existed then and has not changed..E mount system is only suited to users of short lenses.
I am certainly not endorsing a website that I have rarely if ever been to.
I stand by my assesment and can make my explaination longer but see no reason to do so.
Note
I do not consider 200mm to be a long lens…however the vibration issue is just one of a consistent series of symptoms consistent with a system that does not serve the needs of long lens and macro shooters.
I posted a lengthier response but it is sitting in moderation.
Meanwhile the macro shots I’ve gotten with A7r and the amazing 180mm f/2.8 Sigma were easy to get – no issues… and I’m a total jerk when it comes to demanding high image quality (with macro at least)
Looks like my a900 just went up in value again.
What a massive beat-up. This line, in particular, takes the cake: “Unfortunately, Sony has a problem with the A7R which is serious for a significant segment of uses…”.
Yeah, right … we all shoot with massive telephoto lenses on tripods on small cameras designed primarily to be used hand-held!
This thread is the perfect example of what has become known as The Internet Amplification Effect!
This extra weight solution being tossed about is complete rubbish.
I’ve been working on a solution and all that’s needed is a single bolt into the base plate to prevent the vibration.
http://flic.kr/p/iwPnDh
A little ingenuity is all it takes.
That workaround looks cool. I don’t mind using those.
could it be possible that this issue only affects some cameras. I have been unable to reproduce the problem.
flimsy tripods with cheap ballheads work best. I can reproduce the ‘problem’ or avoid it easily on my NEX3.
Ooh, I could easily reproduce it (weeks ago) with my Losmandy G-11 tripod+mount+counterweights+drive and an LZOS 750mm f/6 Apo – the mount weights ±40 kg (90 lbs), can handle >30 kg (65 lbs), and is loaded with ±15 kg (OTA+ adapters+camera)… flimsy is something else…
I wonder if what we’ve discovered is that the joint formed by an A7r on the particular Nikon to NEX adaptor tested has a resonant frequency around 1/100 sec.
The Gariz leather case eliminates the problem!
are you serious???
Lol I would seriously laugh if it does. That’d be great if it did. As others mentioned if you aren’t shooting at “1/Focal Length” with such large tele zooms then it’s user error not the cameras fault.
The problem is not unique to the A7R.
I have experienced a similar situation on other brands. I have solved it by letting machine a custom mount which attaches as usual under the camera body but extends forward past the center of gravity of the camera+lens. At the point of the CG i attach a standard quick mount plate.
This custom mount has a shallow seat for the camera housing which prevents the camera from rotating, which it otherwise would do since it is attached with only one 1/4-20 mounting screw.
A similar arrangement keeps the entire assembly from rotation around the standard mounting screw for the quick mount plate.
I have some pictures that I have taken during the Xmas show of one of my kids. The pictures have been taken at 1600 iso, 1/1250, f1.8 with a nikon Ai lens (105/1.8, http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/105f18.htm). I have not seen any issue. I can read perfectly the mark of the microphone (and my lens is not the most sharp lens you can have) from a distance of about 10 meters. The camera was not on a tripod. I was taking pictures by hand. I use a Metabones adapter http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_NFG-E-BM1. It looks like it’s a combination of factors that generate the problem.
1/1250 is too fast for the vibration to affect the photo, and 105/1.8 is not long enough ( it was mentioned in the article). try 1/15 on tripod with longer lens.
All of this is very interesting, especially since I am planing on buying one.
In 30 plus years of photography, the only time I have seen this problem was with my Pentax 67, with the mirror locked up, and on a tripod, all images between 1/15 & 1/125 were soft. The massive shutter just rocked the camera, and longer exposures were not a problem as the time the camera was not vibrating was far more than the time of vibration.
I would speculate that as pixel count rises, this will become a major problem with any moving parts connected to the camera. In my interior work even a person walking across the floor behind the camera has blurred my images.
Therefore the blur problem has always been there, we just could not enlarge the image enough to see it (grain or pixels were larger than the shake/vibration radius).
I have seen the problem many times with ‘analog’ reflex cameras, even with the mirror pre-released or locked in an upward position – shutter shock impulse and resonant effects are to be blamed here. Resolution (sometimes) is to brace the camera body in the rig and dampen the vibration, sometimes it is better to replace the camera body…
As someone from Canon user forum bring my attention regarding this thread. So I did an experiment with my own Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II, which doesn’t have image stabilizer.
I used my α7R with 2 seconds self timer delay, Manfrotto 190 XPROB tripod on Arca Swiss Z1 ball-head. Personally I don’t have any noticeable ‘vibration problem’:
Full size JPEG files are in Flickr as below:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11882022485/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11882857436/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11882442254/
Also someone from Canon forum pointing out that my 200L f/2.8L II doesn’t have the tripod foot, so I have another shoots with my 28-300L @ 300mm, f/5.6 and 25″. Beside from the lens softness, there is NO vibration:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11894269843/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11894392494/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/11894411314/
Regards
x_tan
This is so spectacularly weird – did you actually read the article?
To sum it up: significant blur occurred with shutter speed from 1/15 to 1/200, “with longer exposures like 1/4 and longer being unaffected” (direct quote from the article)
Your shutter speed is 25″ and thus unaffected – same goes with your other tests too.
Before criticize someone’s opinion, you may have to first listen to it first.
Reading all of these forums regarding this terrible problem of shutter vibration and being the owner of an A7R, my scientific investigation have revealed that this author and digLloyd feel inadequate holding such small instruments that they have to nit pick. Leaving me with the question ” didn’t your mothers and wives teach you it not the size that is important but the skill in which you use it.”
Obviously even the assistance of a tripod doesn’t alleviate the problem for these two inadequate commentators.
The shutter vibration and sound for that matter are non existent problems. You need to take care with this instrument, the A7R, those 36MP can be to much horsepower for little boys to handle. The shutter sound is not excessively loud, it’s just a different sound signature than what you may be familiar with.
I encourage you to buy this wonderful machine and pay no attention to the boys to squabbling over whose dad has the biggest muscles. The real problems with the A7 and A7R are not permanent; lack of native lenses, no intervalometer, or cabled remote to access the bulb feature, lack of options for bracketing, and having to keep your finger on the shutter release until the bracket is complete. I’d put money on this that these matter will be non-existent soon too.
I wonder where’s the results presented for your scientific investigation?
My own tests revealed that the shuttershock issue is very real and needs to be fixed by Sony. At the moment closeup or macro shots are very difficult with the camera (A7R) on tripod in vertical position using medium shutter speeds (ca. 1/5 – 1/125 s). This is without using extra weights attached on the camera.
Using a Nikon D800 with MLU or liveview gives sharper results. Shutter in the D800 seems much more quiet too. I think delayed exposure mode would help to some extend and should be introduced with the next firmware realease.
I own a A7R and all of my images shot with a 200mm EF lens are pin sharp but I have a very snug 100 gram L bracket attached to the base of the camera and when I exposure with longer lenses at the speeds mentioned I always use a 3 second timer delay.
I just noticed this problem with the 55mm FE and 35mm FE on a portrait shoot. Shot vertical at 1/80-100s. I think the difference was that I shot at waist level and not the usual eye level. I normally plant it very firmly against my eye socket and is probably why I’ve never seen it til now.