• 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 / Sharpness testing, part 17

Sharpness testing, part 17

November 23, 2013 JimK 1 Comment

Since I had the 400 set up, I ran the previous tests using the D800E instead of the Leica M240.

Horizontal camera orientation, shutter tripped remotely, no shutter delay:

h 0 sec

Horizontal camera orientation, shutter tripped remotely, 3 second shutter delay:

h 3 sec

Vertical camera orientation, shutter tripped remotely, no shutter delay:

v 0 sec

Vertical camera orientation, shutter tripped remotely, 3 second shutter delay:

v 3 sev

And, just for completeness, horizontal camera orientation, live view on, shutter tripped remotely, 3 second shutter delay:

lv h 3 sec

Note that we don’t see the beginning of the sinusoidal mirror-slap-induced vibration.  It starts before the shutter opens. It looks like the visible trace begins about 30 degrees, or 80 milliseconds, after the mirror sets off the vibration.

Without the shutter delay, the vibration is awful in the vertical direction (camera orientation horizontal). It makes sense that most of the mirror-slap-induced vibration is vertical, since the mirror motion is upwards. The vertical 10 Hz vibration is close to 20 pixels (remember, these are D800E pixels, closer together than the M240 pixels) peak to peak, and showing no sign of damping out in the half-second exposure. The horizontal vibration is four or five pixels peak to peak, the same 10 Hz frequency, and appears to be mostly damped out by the end of the 1/2 second exposure. It’s pretty hard to see this, since the amplitude of the vibration is about the same as the diameter of the focused spot.

There is some shutter opening vibration on the shutter-delayed images with the camera in a horizontal orientation (or possibly residual mirror-slap that didn’t damp out in three seconds — I’ll have to test some more), but it’s not too big. Live view is no worse than regular mode, because of the three second delay.

So, compared to mirror slap, the Leica M240 live view errors look pretty small. I wish I could back up further so the spot size would be smaller. I’m already 30+ feet away. To get much further I need to go outside and do it at night.

The Last Word

← Sharpness testing, part 16 Sharpness testing, part 18 →

Trackbacks

  1. Sony a7R testing, part 1 | The Last Word says:
    January 3, 2015 at 4:00 pm

    […] a fundamental frequency of 10 Hz. This is about the same frequency as with the D800E tests shown here and here. That’s what you’d expect, since the lighter weight of the a7R compared to the D800E […]

    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.