• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / D850 / D850 vibration with the Nikon 200/2

D850 vibration with the Nikon 200/2

November 17, 2017 JimK 10 Comments

This is the 25th post in a series of Nikon D850 tests. The series starts here.

I did a test of the effect of vibration on image sharpness in the D850 with an 85 mm lens here. There were a few mild surprises, but nothing earth-shaking. I wanted to try the Nikon 200 mm f/2 VR I in a similar test, to see what happened when the shake magnification by the lens increased, and also to see what happened if the direction of shutter and mirror motion were side-to-side, where a tripod is not as stiff. The rotating collar on the 200/2 makes that easy.

As before, I used these shutter modes:

  • Normal operation, with flapping mirror and mechanical shutter
  • Mirror up operation with electronic first-curtain shutter (EFCS)
  • Live view operation with EFCS
  • Live view operation with electronic shutter

 

Here’s the target in portrait mode:

 

In this case, I used the vertical edge, which should see the greatest effects of vibration. In the case of the landscape mode shots, I used the horizontal edge, which should also suffer the most.

I set the lens to its sharpest on-axis aperture, f/4. I focused using live view, peaking, and maximum magnification. I used a Nikon intervalometer to make 32 exposure with each shutter mode.

Here’s the rest of the particulars:

  • Vinyl tile on 8″ concrete on grade floor
  • Gitzo Systematic 4 legs
  • Arca Swiss C1 head
  • 1/100 second exposure duration
  • ISO 64

Here’s what I got in landscape orientation:

The vertical axis is the MTF50 measured in cycles per picture height, a standard measure of sharpness. Higher is better. I’ve plotted the worst, average (aka mean), and best results, and also the mean plus and minus the standard deviation (aka sigma). As expected, the normal mode of operation, with the mirror flipping up when the shutter release is depressed, is the worst.  The green line is the best sharpness found in the test in an earlier post for that lens and target. That protocol used a combination of manual focusing and the D850’s Focus Shift Shooting feature (which uses the electronic shutter) to find the plane of sharpest on-axis focus.

Note that the trailing curtain of the EFCS mode degrades the sharpness more than the fully electronic shutter.

The other two raw channels:

 

They are similar.

In portrait orientation, the flapping mirror makes things so much worse that I had to change the vertical scale:

 

 

In portrait orientation, there is one thing that is different in the relationship between the four modes. LV EFCS is not as good as Mup EFCS. I’m not sure what that’s about.

If you want a feel for what the portrait mode numbers mean visually, here are tight crops of the zone plate in the middle of the target, enlarged to a bit less than 200%:

Normal mode, flapping mirror

 

Mup

 

LV Electronic Shutter

 

LV EFCS

 

 

D850

← D850 focus confirmation accuracy The Sony a7RIII eats stars →

Comments

  1. Anton says

    November 17, 2017 at 6:44 pm

    Very off topic and not for publishing really but for your gfx series I just noticed this

    The contax zeiss 85 1.2 works very well on the gfx

    http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/03/06/the-contax-85-1-2-60-year-anniversary-lens-by-mark-wu/

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 17, 2017 at 8:24 pm

      Ah, what the hey; someone else might find this interesting. Thanks!

      Reply
  2. Lynn Allan says

    November 19, 2017 at 6:35 am

    Regarding this series of D850 tests: this Canon 6d semi-defector to the Sony a7Rii would appreciate summary comment[s] about the tested characteristic such as how the D850 compares to the D810 and/or a7Rii and/or [fill-in-the-blank]. Better? Worse? About the same?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 19, 2017 at 7:08 am

      I don’t know the D850 well enough yet to be definitive, but I will cover that when I get to the summary. At this point I can say that the D850 is a big improvement over the D810, which was a big improvement over the D800, which was an excellent camera.

      Reply
  3. Chris Livsey says

    November 19, 2017 at 10:55 am

    “At this point I can say that the D850 is a big improvement over the D810, which was a big improvement over the D800, which was an excellent camera.”

    Jim, I’m very disappointed in that statement, how “big”, how was “big” measured, Gitzo Systematic or Studio Stand , razor slant edge or inkjet printed target, we need the mean at least and =/+ sigma , is the “big” the same exact unit of measure between the three cameras, surely your not going to lapse into subjectivity ?
    Seriously thank you for the continuing work, even if not actively commenting it is rest assured greatly appreciated anfd I hope your health continues to hold up and indeed improve.

    Reply
  4. John Daniel Singaram says

    November 20, 2017 at 9:07 am

    since you have used both D850 and GFX, how do you compare them in terms of RAW output and working with the files. Is there a big difference switching to GFX instead of D850?

    Thank you,

    John

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 20, 2017 at 10:04 am

      They are both great cameras. I think the biggest differences are the EVF vs OVF, the user interface and the native line of AF lenses. The Fuji lenses are as a (small) group are definitely a cut above the Nikkors. There are focusing issues with both cameras. I expect the GFX will have a 100 MP sibling fairly soon. I’m thinking that it will be longer before the D8xx gets there.

      Reply
  5. Ilkka Nissilä says

    November 22, 2017 at 12:48 am

    The first version of the VR 200/2 has a vibration-prone tripod mount; Mk II is much better (the lens doesn’t stay ringing after nudged, the vibration dies quickly). Also the wide open contrast is improved.

    Reply
    • Ilkka Nissilä says

      November 22, 2017 at 12:51 am

      The reason this is important is because EFCS/ES/LV won’t help subdue vibrations due to wind in the field but a lens with a good tripod mount (combined with a good tripod and head (which you are already using)) will help keep the effects of wind to a minimum as well as reduce the effects of shutter and mirror induced vibrations.

      Reply
  6. karl otto says

    February 4, 2018 at 8:04 am

    Hi Jim,

    Thank you for those excellent tests. t
    The vertical test you did is exactly what I found (D810) on one of my best pictures – In vertical at the left side the trees suddenly had twice as many branches. The bukey changed to be unpleasant. Perhaps it was a flimsy light tripod with VR on and mirror up at 1/640 sec exposure time. VR off was actually worse for the 70-200/2.8 VRII. That’s all I can say. Still this picture looks great in 20 x 60 in as a prospective.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.