[Robert N]

Please find below a comprehensive comparison between mechanical and electronic shutter performance for wildlife and sports. DSLRs seem to be still very much in the frame.

You Tube

You Tube

---

Last edited by Robert N; 11-22-2022 at 01:44 PM. Reason: Update

[tryphon4]

I found this video mostly useless as almost every topic is well known, but beginners may not share my point of view.
In fact, I just learned that electronic front shutter is prone to deliver a nervous bokeh, this is interesting.
Another interesting thing is Pangolin photo host seems to be made by Canonists for Canonists.

[Digitalis]

Electronic shutters also do not play well with electronic LED lighting or electronic display systems that are becoming increasingly prominent in high end sports venues. For wildlife panning shots, or images with rapid movement can develop odd distortions when electronic shutters are used. Until global shutters are employed mechanical shutters are going to persistently deliver superior results to rolling electronic shutters.

[Driline]

What is it with those earrings? Are they miniature brooms or what? And the one on the left side has its bristles out of whack.

And why are Aussie women so much cuter than their British counterparts?

These are questions that must be answered.......

[Apet-Sure]

And why are Aussie women so much cuter than their British counterparts?

Do they have pangolins in Australia? I thought they were mostly in Asia and Africa. And I don't think they have lions in the wild in Australia. I assumed this lady was in South Africa.

...just checked, yeah, they are in Africa.

[StiffLegged]

DSLRs seem to be still very much in the frame.

Rank heresy! You will now eat Thom Hogan’s complete guide to the D810, without ketchup, while wearing sackcloth. Any further outrages will be punished most severely.

[repaap]

Electronic shutters also do not play well with electronic LED lighting or electronic display systems that are becoming increasingly prominent in high end sports venues. For wildlife panning shots, or images with rapid movement can develop odd distortions when electronic shutters are used. Until global shutters are employed mechanical shutters are going to persistently deliver superior results to rolling electronic shutters.

I have Canon R5C and while it should be one of most performing with stacked sensor and all that, this is the case with LED lights. Most, if not all of cheap ones used in most public places does introduce flicker. So much for shooting in silent places with completelly silent mode. Yes mechanical shutter is silent, but not that silent in R5C, but it is only way to go if you don't want to risk that banding.


Good thing is that K-3III is actually not that loud and these mirroros will be more and more damped. Benefits with flicker and that jello distortion, or complete lack of it is great.

[Rush2112]

Electronic shutters also do not play well with electronic LED lighting or electronic display systems that are becoming increasingly prominent in high end sports venues. For wildlife panning shots, or images with rapid movement can develop odd distortions when electronic shutters are used. Until global shutters are employed mechanical shutters are going to persistently deliver superior results to rolling electronic shutters.

Like CCD's?

[beholder3]

Like CCD's?

Yes and CCD just like CMOS sensor with global shutters share the same problem: poor noise performance in poor light.

Global shutter sensors have been around for a long time, but so far nobody was able to balance the hit to light capturing caused by the additional circuits needed.

[Rush2112]

That's because manufacturers gave up on CCD, and they did that because of higher manufacturing costs. I'm fairly certain that with modern technology and fab techniques that CCD could be quite improved over the last iteration of CCD sensors that hit the market well over a decade ago.

[Digitalis]

That's because manufacturers gave up on CCD, and they did that because of higher manufacturing costs. I'm fairly certain that with modern technology and fab techniques that CCD could be quite improved over the last iteration of CCD sensors that hit the market well over a decade ago.

I seriously doubt any manufacturer in the near future is going to shovel that kind of capital expenditure on R&D with a technology that has been so thoroughly supplanted by an easier and cheaper one. Though CCD sensors remain quite common in Astro and Scientific areas mainly because of their inherently higher image quality and extended spectral sensitivity compared to CMOS. The sensors on the JWST are based upon CCD architecture (but use an entirely different substrate than visible light sensors) due to the extremely wide sensitivity bandwidth the telescope is designed to capture.

[Rush2112]

I seriously doubt it too.