• 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 / The Last Word / a7RII EFCS max shutter speed for native lenses

a7RII EFCS max shutter speed for native lenses

August 14, 2015 JimK 15 Comments

A few days ago, I determined that shutter speeds over 1/1000 second using electronic first curtain shutter (EFCS) on the Sony a7RII with a Zeiss 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar ZF lens showed some exposure unevenness, and shots over 1/2000 second showed a lot.

Sony warns in the a7RII manual that exposures using EFCS made with non-native lenses will (not may) be uneven. I’ve found no material problems at 1/1000 and below with the Zeiss 100/2, though.

I set up a comparison between that lens and the Sony 90mm f/2.8 FE macro lens. I set up an oscilloscope with a high-frequency triangle wave as input, set the time base to 500 microseconds per division, and made a series of photographs.

Zeiss. 1/2000
Zeiss. 1/2000
Sony, 1/2000
Sony, 1/2000

The Sony exposure is much more even.

Zeiss, 1/4000
Zeiss, 1/4000
Sony, 1/4000
Sony, 1/4000

The Sony exposure is much more even.

Zeiss, 1/8000
Zeiss, 1/8000

Hardly anything at the top of the frame.

Sony, 1/8000
Sony, 1/8000

Not perfect, but not bad at all.

What is Sony doing to even out the exposure for native lenses, and why can’t they do it for third-party ones?

The Last Word

← Sony a7RII conversion gain visual changes — base ISO 12800 AF-S versus manual focusing with the a7RII →

Comments

  1. CarVac says

    August 14, 2015 at 8:57 am

    Perhaps it has to do with the location of the exit pupil affecting the offset of the shadow from the shutter curtain.

    Reply
    • Jim says

      August 14, 2015 at 12:24 pm

      Yes, and that is f-stop and subject distance dependent as well. Is Sony taking all that into account? At least with the 90/2.8 FE, the errors are all in the same direction: exposures to short at the optical top of he image (physical bottom).

      Reply
      • CarVac says

        August 14, 2015 at 2:38 pm

        The f-stop probably only affects how sharp the exposure cutoff is from the rear curtain. (the top right side in your images).

        The closer the exit pupil is to the sensor, the faster the shadow of the rear curtain moves. The farther away the exit pupil is, the slower it moves. It should always be correct at the center.

        With the 100/2, the exit pupil is (probably) pretty far forward (the datasheet doesn’t seem to give that anymore), so the second curtain’s shadow begins sooner and moves slower than expected, making the top of the image dark and the bottom light.

        I suspect that for third party lenses it assumes a fairly close exit pupil for use with small adapted rangefinder lenses: thus the electronic front curtain starts a bit later and travels a bit faster to keep up with the curtain’s shadow.

        With first party lenses, they probably know pretty much where the exit pupil is based on zoom and focus and can adjust the timing and speed of the electronic front curtain appropriately.

        Now that I pay attention, it says in my 60D manual:

        “If you use a TS-E lens to make vertical shift movements or use an Extension Tube, be sure to set this to [Disable]. Setting it to [Mode 1] or [Mode 2] will result in incorrect or irregular exposures. When you press the shutter button completely, the shutter will sound like it took two shots. However, only one shot will be taken.”

        Clearly, it knows and can compensate for the exit pupil position for first-party lenses, EXCEPT when you have an extension tube (which just extends the wires, it doesn’t tell the camera) or have shifted a tilt-shift lens.

        I imagine this could be a minor problem for 3rd party lenses, since they often spoof their identities.

        Reply
        • Jim says

          August 14, 2015 at 3:55 pm

          The f-stop probably only affects how sharp the exposure cutoff is from the rear curtain. (the top right side in your images).

          Take a look at this:

          http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56303687

          http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56307652

          Jim

          Reply
          • CarVac says

            August 14, 2015 at 5:29 pm

            Huh, I didn’t consider that.

            Even if the timings and speeds are correct it’ll still cause a gradient in the background blur.

            Reply
        • Jim says

          August 14, 2015 at 3:58 pm

          I suspect that for third party lenses it assumes a fairly close exit pupil for use with small adapted rangefinder lenses: thus the electronic front curtain starts a bit later and travels a bit faster to keep up with the curtain’s shadow.

          That’s an interesting idea. I could repeat the test with the Nikon 60mm macro, and if you’re right, it will be better.

          Jim

          Reply
          • CarVac says

            August 14, 2015 at 5:34 pm

            As long as it’s significantly less telecentric, it should show some difference.

            You could also do a more crude check by just comparing the exposure evenness differences between the mechanical shutter and EFCS using the Leica symmetrical wideangles at 1/8000. If I’m correct, the bottom half of the image should be darker in that case.

            Reply
  2. Pixelerate says

    August 19, 2015 at 11:40 am

    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56340864

    Please can you give your opinion regarding this feature? Would you be able to request it on the sony site? You have more of a following than me. I think the EFCS feature, where EFCS is disabled at higher shutter speeds, is essential to outdoor photography.

    I have found huge problems when light changes quickly

    Reply
    • Jim says

      August 19, 2015 at 11:53 am

      I’m sorry, but I have no contacts at Sony, and no reason to think that anyone in a position of authority there knows I exist.

      I am worried that, if Sony puts an automatic defeat of EFCS at some shutter speeds, they will defeat its usage for non-naitve lenses, and that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

      Jim

      Reply
      • Featured says

        August 20, 2015 at 6:45 am

        https://community.sony.com/t5/Alpha-NEX-Cameras/Feature-Request-a7rII-EFCS-Problem-Easy-Fix-amp-Spot-Metering/td-p/519978

        On a sunny day, with any lens, you get huge banding from EFCS.

        I’ve submitted a feature request there

        Reply
  3. n/a says

    September 3, 2015 at 8:40 am

    Jim, did you investigate electronic rolling shutter & efcs at very short exposure times in forced APS-C mode (when A7RII makes 18mp raws instead of 42mp raws) ? thx

    Reply
    • Jim says

      September 3, 2015 at 9:55 am

      I did look at Silent Shutter in APS-C mode:

      http://blog.kasson.com/?p=11273

      but not EFCS. You can get a sense of EFCS by just mentally omitting the top part of the full frame images.

      Jim

      Reply
  4. Joel says

    December 6, 2021 at 8:32 am

    An oscilloscope is like a tv monitor with display that scans on a line by line basis. It’s common knowledge that this interfers with photography. Furthermore, each lens refracts light in a different way.

    If one wants an accurate, pertinent comparison, one might want to take pictures of a test chart.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      December 6, 2021 at 8:56 am

      You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way that analog oscilloscopes work. They don’t scan line by line. As far as the scope is concerned, there are no lines.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. EFCS and Bokeh — a7RII with Sony 90/2.8 macro | The Last Word says:
    December 23, 2015 at 3:57 pm

    […] There was a recent post on DPR that showed dramatic effects on bokeh of EFCS. It was a apples/oranges comparison, with the mechanical and EFCS shutter speed different from each other, and the EFCS set to 1/8000, which is clearly out of the range where EFCS usually works well. […]

    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.