• 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 / Mirror slap and shutter shock on the Nikon D810

Mirror slap and shutter shock on the Nikon D810

August 3, 2014 JimK 3 Comments

There are rumors that the D810’s mirror and shutter motions are less damaging to image sharpness than those of the D800.

I thought it was worth running a test.

I put a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG on a D810, the camera in landscape orientation to an Arca Swiss Cube with a RRS L-bracket, and mounted the head to a sturdy set of RRS legs. Since the mirror and shutter in the D8x0 move up and down, and the tripod is stiffer in the vertical direction, the landscape orientation is the least vibration-prone way to orient the camera.

I aimed the camera at a slanted edge target illuminated with a Fotodiox 5500K LED flood.  I set the self-timer to two seconds. I focused wide open, then set the aperture to f/5.6, the shutter speed to 1/400, the ISO to 100, and made an exposure. Then I turned down the flood (which doesn’t change color temperature as you reduce the light output) 1/3 of a stop, I made exposures with about the same mean sensor level in 1/3 stop intervals at shutter speeds down to 1/4 second.

Then I mounted a D800E and did the whole thing again.

I brought the raw files into Lightroom 5.6, set the white balance to Daylight, cropped to the target, and exported them as TIFF’s. I analysed the modulation transfer function (MTF) of all the images in Imatest using the horizontal edges.

800 810 50mm L MTF50
MTF50
MTF30
MTF30

There’s not much difference, but there’s a slight improvement with the D810. The vibration tends to increase with shutter speed. I fit logarithmic lines to the data so you can better judge that trend.

Mounting the cameras in portrait orientation and using the vertical edge give quite a different result:

MTF50
MTF50
MTF30
MTF30

The worst shutter speeds for both cameras are around 1/40 second, with the D810 again being slightly better. The difference between the two cameras  is greater in this orientation, but in both cases the differences are small; this is not a reason to upgrade from a D800.

The Last Word

← Nikon D810 summary Getting ready for another exhibition →

Comments

  1. Steve in AZ says

    August 4, 2014 at 1:35 pm

    If you tried less formidable — dare I say gold-plated — support, for example an air-travel tripod and mounted a long zoom on it, I believe you’d find a good deal more difference between the cameras. The difference might not have much practical consequence in that both images might be too degraded to use, but there should be a lot of difference in blur amplitude at the most impacted shutter speeds.

    Reply
    • Jim says

      August 4, 2014 at 2:24 pm

      Well, that’s refreshing! Usually people tell me that there’s no problem with their SoNiCanon A-744Q, that I’ve got if in for the manufacturer, and that all my vibration problems stem from not mounting the camera properly.

      I’m sure you’re right. Longer lenses and Flexible-Flyer tripods will magnify any differences. OTOH, When the camera’s on a tripod, 95% of the time you’re going to use mirror lockup. And 99% of the time, if there’s EFCS, you’ll use that, too. Those things will make a much bigger difference than the difference between the two cameras when the mirrors are flapping.

      Jim

      Reply
  2. Lynn Allan says

    August 13, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    Thanks for providing this. I’m curious how a graph with A7r shutter shock values would super-impose on the D800 and D810 values.

    And while I’m asking, do you have “shutter shock” values for the Canon 6d and/or 5d3 and/or 1Dx? If so, could they be super-imposed?

    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.