[awscreo]

I received my K1 and DFA 28-105 on release day; my initial review of that lens was lack of micro-contrast. Since then, it has become reasonably clear that shutter/mirror shock affects the 28-105 at speeds around 1/30 to 1/200. I have not had similar experiences with any other lens on the K1 - mainly primes or heavy zooms. Possibly the lighter construction of the 28-105, together with the fact it has many sliding joints makes it especially susceptible to any vibrations the camera produces. Maybe it's because my camera is very early (March 2016 build).

I had a similar experience with the 18-135 on the K5. My experience with pretty much any other lens on both bodies is that the mirror/shutter shock is negligible except for any tripod/long exposure shot. For this, the 2 sec delay shot from LV seems optimum, though I have to agree that the EFCS is extra protection in this situation.

:-)

Mine is a August 2016 build for k-1, 28-105 was purchased in February 2017, still same issue. I wonder if anyone else with this combo has no issues at all, or less at least, then I can try to argue with Pentax that it's out of spec?

[pschlute]

I did some testing today. First with the K1 + DA* 300. Tested in the range 1/30-1/1000. On a solid tripod and aimed at a brick wall 60 metres away.

As expected when using Live view Electronic Shutter gave clear images at all shutter speeds.

Using remote trigger only: 1/30 and 1/60 were significantly blurred. At 1/125 the image was improving, and at 1/250 had a sharp image.

Using remote trigger with MLU i had the same results as with remote only.....ie it is shutter shock.

Handholding the DA* 300 with SR on gave me interesting results. At 1/30 it was as bad as the tripod with remote only. At 1/60 and 1/125 I was able to produce a sharper image than with the tripod (with remote only) , and 1/250 and above it was producing the same sharp picture as with the tripod.

I then put the DFA 24-70 on the k1 and did some test shots at 70mm on the tripod. Absolutely no difference to my pictures whether using remote; remote MLU; or LV ES. All equally sharp.

So why does the shutter shock affect the 300mm and not the 24-70mm ? Is it a matter of degree...ie just not noticeable on the 24-70 as the image is not zoomed as much ? Is it due to the way the tripod is mounted differently with the 300mm (lens foot) versus the 24-70 (camera is tripod mounted)

[stevebrot]

I wonder if anyone else with this combo has no issues at all

A sad fact about Internet forums and user reviews is that success stories regarding a specific issue of design/construction are usually rare. Problem threads attract those with problems (whether pertinent to the OP or not) and the few who post "no problem here" are typically ignored. After awhile, the user is left wondering, "Is it something about me?" and sometimes the problem is traceable to some element of technique. Likewise, a "no problem here" situation may simply indicate that the user is not picky enough.


Steve

[stevebrot]

So why does the shutter shock affect the 300mm and not the 24-70mm ? Is it a matter of degree...ie just not noticeable on the 24-70 as the image is not zoomed as much ? Is it due to the way the tripod is mounted differently with the 300mm (lens foot) versus the 24-70 (camera is tripod mounted)

Magnification, ummm, magnifies camera motion so those extra 230mm do make a difference. Your comment regarding mount method might warrant further serious consideration. The shutter movement has been provided with leverage when supported via the lens foot that is missing when attaching at the body. In addition, potential for resonance through the foot attachment may be higher as well.


Steve

[jbinpg]

Test with a beanbag as Steve suggested earlier to see if resonance is the problem.

[stevebrot]

This is just a short note to express how troublesome things like "shutter shock" are. We have the expectation that the march of progress would have freed us from things as trivial as shutter blade inertia. After all, that is what shutter shock at "slow" shutter speeds is...the resonating tremor caused by a few hundred milligrams of metal accelerating/decelerating before/after a short trip across the frame. One would think that the state of the art should have progressed a bit since the late-1980s.

Sadly, increased quality of long lenses coupled with high sensor resolution allows us to see what has been with us for years. Almost as sad is that our camera support (tripods + heads) sometimes contribute to the problem with kickback resonance from the first curtain braking action. Going down the list, with the tripod out of the picture we have subtle interactions between user technique, Pentax SR, and camera initiated vibration. I am discovering that I can no longer shoot hand-held with a heavy 200mm lens.

Lastly, not all vibration comes from the camera, even if paired to a competent tripod. Wind is an ever-present foe as are the temblors from traffic.

Conventional wisdom:

1. Expect greater impact from all causes at slower shutter speeds
2. Dampen with extra mass
3. Avoid creating levers with gear. This includes suspended mass acting as a pendulum.
4. Be aware that when the wind blows, the tripod hums a tune
5. Tripod resonance is real. Tap the leg and feel the response on the prism housing.
6. It is terribly hard to be perfectly smooth when releasing the shutter
7. For the most part, any camera support is better than none

One might add that stability is often an exercise in compromise. Consider the setup below in light of #3 in the list above.




Steve

[dfp771]

Steve,
Again, I don't see this issue with my K-1. My K-1 was manufactured on April 12, 2016 with a shutter count of 8711 per the exif viewer. I took two shots, hand held with the Rokinon 135mm F2 lens. One was @ 1/30 sec, F2.0, ISO 100. The other was at 1/80 sec., F 3.2, ISO 640. Both images are tack sharp. The first image was held in portrait mode (which makes holding the camera less steady with this heavy lens). Maybe my technique is very good. I shoot portraits of models, mostly these days. IG is davidfparkerthephotographer. Image files are 100% cropped to 1400 x 900 pix.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Gutta Perka]

...shall I buy a Rokinon 135 to on that damned K1...NO.

As earlier from the fifties and on I want to lift the camera prepared to take any shot - with any OLD-time presets to get what I EXPECT with any lens to get something I expect to get.

I know of long lenses and shutter-speeds and how to handle that etc - but I'm not walking through the environment with constant LV and menu settings for e-shutter.
That a step backwards - not forward in photography. (Slow synthetic shit that is!)

I'm now sitting here and everyone says "24-70mm" will do the thing - ok it might - but my friend's is a bit soft-cornered and also - as I'm picky - noticing some shutter--blur now and then.

The 24-70mm is about (here in Sweden with sales-tax) around 75% of a new K1-house. Is that an option - really to solve casual immediate shooting without problems?

With the K3 and Tammy 17-50mm I get better 17" panoramas - without hassle - however the k3 is a bit "grainy" upping the ISO.

Could KP be a better solution for my lenses - does KP do as well as my KIIs in dynamic range?????

I can afford but do not want to be stupid - what shall I buy to feel good and confident?
(I like compur-shutters. That is iris-shutters in the lens itself. )
I have scanned film from K2-DMD with a top scanner from K M100/4 film with top results and used that damned old lens on K1.
Some of the new K1 shoots suffer with that lens if not doing all the tricks You propose above.

I'm back to K5IIs and K3 to get at least the quality prints I awaits.

OK I'll save my Pentax FF-lenses until this is solved - when a new K1 arrives - I'll buy that instead if Pentax still exists.
My Canicon-friends also have problems - however mostly more relaxed ones!

As said a 24-70mm is almost 75% the price of a new K1-house (Sweden) - I will not buy it - all of this might be a dead end.
- And not liking two kilogram around my neck - as well.

On my K3-K5IIs the 28-105mm is optically a splendid lens at any shutterspeed - but not ment for that.
As said I'm back to APS-C pentaxes. That said I do not think it's normal going around using K1 with LV, e-shutter and bean-bags.

Me angry - not - just feel fooled and could have bought something else for my loved ones.
When one is fooled - it often depends to one being too eager - not letting other doing the wrongs.

[biz-engineer]

Could KP be a better solution for my lenses - does KP do as well as my KIIs in dynamic range?????

They've implemented the ES with OVF on KP... interesting as apsc series suffer less of shutter shock. The minimum RI could do, is to be honest and do a firmware upgrade for the K1, it is technically possible because Pixel Shift can be shot from OVF.

[awscreo]

They've implemented the ES with OVF on KP... interesting as apsc series suffer less of shutter shock. The minimum RI could do, is to be honest and do a firmware upgrade for the K1, it is technically possible because Pixel Shift can be shot from OVF.

We should make a petition I'd definitely use that with the dfa