• 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 / Sony a7R shutter vibration with 135 Telyt

Sony a7R shutter vibration with 135 Telyt

December 5, 2013 JimK 1 Comment

I mounted a Leica 135mm f/3.4 APO Telyt on the a7R, mounted the camera on the tripod head with a generic RRS plate (RRS does not at present have custom plates for the a7 or a7R), and made an image (details in the preceding post). Here it is with as 6x expansion vertically and 2x horizontally:

135mm horo 6to1

Can’t tell vibration from the ‘scope spot size. I went back, turned the ‘scope intensity down so far I couldn’t see it with the room lights on, refocused the ‘scope, and tried again. Here it is at 6x vertical, 2x horizontal expansion:

135 noro 3to1 dim

Surely not definitive. I think we can say for sure that whatever vibration there is has a peak to peak amplitude of two pixels or less. Maybe a lot less. The only way to find out for sure is get a lot further away from the scope than thirty feet, and I don’t have a practical, repeatable way to do that.

We can make some conservative calculations from the work in the previous post with the 400mm lens. Assuming the vibration is no worse than with the 400, the result on the sensor ought to be roughly a third as large with a 135mm lens because of the ratio of the focal lengths, or about 1.5 pixels peak to peak. There is every reason to think that it is substantially less than that. With a collar-mounted lens, the shutter is some distance from the point at which the tripod attaches — with the 400 it’s more than a foot — and therefore it has a mechanical advantage when it moves that makes the whole assembly swing up and down pivoting on the tripod mount point. When the tripod mounts to the camera through a plate on the camera base, the shutter has to work a lot harder to move the camera/lens combination.

I had hoped to be able to answer the question, “Is the vibration less when using a collar on the lens adapter, or when the camera is attached to the tripod using a plate on the bottom?” I don’t have a sufficiently fine spot to do that. With a perfect lens that has no diffraction, to get a one-pixel spot on the D800E or a7R with a 100mm lens, I need to be 21 meters away from a 1 mm light source. With a 135mm lens, I need to be 29 meters away from a 1 mm light source.

Maybe I could do something with a couple of mirrors. Hmm…

The Last Word

← Sony a7R testing, part 1 Sony a7R noise floor →

Comments

  1. Herb Sennet says

    December 6, 2013 at 9:25 am

    Hello Jim,
    What I coincidence!. Today I posted again my results of the shutter vibration test with the A7r. Far less sophisticated than yours of course, but I came exactly to the same conclusion.
    No direct worries for native lenses or adapted lenses to 90 mm. Problems occur around 1/30s with longer adapted lenses and where required the use of a tripod collar.
    Please see my results here:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/leicasonyzeiss/

    With kind regards,
    Herb

    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.