Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-31-2011, 04:25 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs
Photos: Albums
Posts: 848
QuoteOriginally posted by billtin59 Quote
This may very well be the case, but the problem would STILL exist with steady hand held and / or fast shutter speed shots, would it not? If SR should be off for tripods, wouldn't there be other circumstances where SR should be off as well?
IF you could hold as steady as a tripod, then yes, turn SR off, but I don't think you can hold that steady, you are alive, right? Your heart is still beating, yes?
A shutter speed fast enough to freeze all camera motion does not need SR, you're right about that. But SR on high shutter speed shots doesn't seem to hurt the image, so why bother with turning it off?

05-31-2011, 05:29 PM   #17
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by DogLover Quote
No offense, but you may need a sharper lens than the 50-200, and you almost certainly need to be outside in sunlight, zoomed into something in the distance.
None taken, I know it's just a kit lens and this was just a quick curiosity test, but shouldn't I get a more noticeable difference anyway? 200mm is 200mm regardless of how near or far the subject. The farther away the less sharp it will be anyway, plus the dimmer indoor lighting gave me a longer shutter speed than bright daylight would, giving the sensor more time to shake, rattle and roll, if you will. Such movement was barely noticable with a slow lens in dim light, my guess is it would be less so with a faster lens in brighter light. But maybe that's just me
05-31-2011, 05:42 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by billtin59 Quote
None taken, I know it's just a kit lens and this was just a quick curiosity test, but shouldn't I get a more noticeable difference anyway? 200mm is 200mm regardless of how near or far the subject. The farther away the less sharp it will be anyway, plus the dimmer indoor lighting gave me a longer shutter speed than bright daylight would, giving the sensor more time to shake, rattle and roll, if you will. Such movement was barely noticable with a slow lens in dim light, my guess is it would be less so with a faster lens in brighter light. But maybe that's just me
No. Think of the lens as having a rigid line extending from the front element to whatever point it's focused on. Any movement at your end gets multiplied at the other, and the longer the distance, the greater the effect.

You also need a lens that's capable of giving a really sharp image under ideal conditions. This is your "control group" and makes it much easier to see when something interferes with that sharpness.
05-31-2011, 05:58 PM   #19
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by DogLover Quote
No. Think of the lens as having a rigid line extending from the front element to whatever point it's focused on. Any movement at your end gets multiplied at the other, and the longer the distance, the greater the effect.
Yes, I know this, like I said it was a curiosity test. The only way you could do a true "scientific" test would be to completely isolate the camera and subject from all outside influences. I don't think Joe Photographer has that capability!

For MY shooting, it doesn't seem to make a difference. As I stated in an earlier post, I don't use it anyway, and if I did, I don't print larger than 8 X 10, so any induced movement wouldn't be noticeable. For those of you shooting posters or for National Geographic, it may well be of benefit to turn it off, I think for the majority of us though, it really doesn't matter.

05-31-2011, 06:27 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by billtin59 Quote
Yes, I know this, like I said it was a curiosity test. The only way you could do a true "scientific" test would be to completely isolate the camera and subject from all outside influences. I don't think Joe Photographer has that capability!

For MY shooting, it doesn't seem to make a difference. As I stated in an earlier post, I don't use it anyway, and if I did, I don't print larger than 8 X 10, so any induced movement wouldn't be noticeable. For those of you shooting posters or for National Geographic, it may well be of benefit to turn it off, I think for the majority of us though, it really doesn't matter.
Despite your quick and dirty "test", I assure you it does matter. I have been able see the difference easily more than once, and I wasn't even trying to test it, I just mistakenly left SR on for a session of tripod shooting with a lens that I know is sharper than the results I got would indicate. You could print at 4x5 and see the difference.
05-31-2011, 07:07 PM   #21
Pentaxian
cmohr's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane. Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,085
Yeah, I had a similar hassle the other day, shooting with my 200/2.8, I had turned off the SR, but, when I changed lenses, it turned back on, my exposures where up to 30sec, and at first when I had not realized it was back on, was scratching my head to figure out why the shots were infact so blurred till I checked setting again and found SR back on, turned SR off again, and all was clear.
05-31-2011, 09:03 PM   #22
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 84
I'm certainly glad to hear the problem is real, BUT, as stated earlier, I don't use SR, and rarely shoot long lenses OR shutter speeds, so for ME, it DOESN'T make a difference. If I do use a tripod, I either use a remote or the 2 sec. delay, Both of which not only eliminate camera shake from pressing the shutter, but also turn off SR if I happen to "accidentally" turn it on while changing lenses!

So what about monopods?????
05-31-2011, 10:30 PM   #23
New Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18
Original Poster
Thank you all for your help with my inquiry, I'll try to get it back on track.

I am not questioning whether it's better or not w/o SR on tripod, I take it as a given (I suppose Pentax would not have bothered to come with it out of the blue and put it in the manual if it were not real).
My curiosity was on the technical specifics of the issue, and post #4 (gp1806) gave me a good starting point so far. I'll try and look for additional info on this matter.

Regarding the desirability of using or not using SR w/ a tripod - I guess one should follow the book. Or not, if he doesn't want to and his results are fine

Thanks again, people.

06-01-2011, 07:12 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs
Photos: Albums
Posts: 848
QuoteOriginally posted by Sunday Quote
Thank you all for your help with my inquiry, I'll try to get it back on track.

I am not questioning whether it's better or not w/o SR on tripod, I take it as a given (I suppose Pentax would not have bothered to come with it out of the blue and put it in the manual if it were not real).
My curiosity was on the technical specifics of the issue, and post #4 (gp1806) gave me a good starting point so far. I'll try and look for additional info on this matter.

Regarding the desirability of using or not using SR w/ a tripod - I guess one should follow the book. Or not, if he doesn't want to and his results are fine

Thanks again, people.
What do you want to know about this?
06-01-2011, 08:19 AM   #25
New Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18
Original Poster
If is true the reason SR hinders the image quality is the sensor vibration caused by electromagnetic(?) noise.
My concern is strictly theoretical, mind you, I'm not planning to fix the issue
06-01-2011, 06:49 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by billtin59 Quote
I'm certainly glad to hear the problem is real, BUT, as stated earlier, I don't use SR, and rarely shoot long lenses OR shutter speeds, so for ME, it DOESN'T make a difference.
Well sure, if you don't use SR, then it can't make a difference. But I absolutely assure you, beyond the slightest possibility of any doubt whatsoever, that if you did use SR, there positively *would* be cases where it would matter. It might be "rare" that you shoot long lenses or shutter speeds, but in those cases, it most certainly would matter. And not just when making 8x10 prints or larger. I mean, even in web-sized viewing, it would be *plainly obvious* quite often when shooting a sufficiently slow shutter speed.

QuoteQuote:
So what about monopods?????
The general consensus, borne out by my experience as well, is that SR and monopods do work together well.

Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 06-03-2011 at 10:08 AM.
06-03-2011, 12:28 AM - 1 Like   #27
Pentaxian
wildman's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,315
It might be useful to make the distinction between shake and vibration.

1. A camera "shakes" when hand held. That is relatively deep low frequency camera movement.

2. A camera vibrates, potentially, when mounted on a tripod. That is relatively shallow high frequency movement.

This is particularly true when using long FL glass on a light tripod. At, say, 20x even the slightest movement becomes apparent. This type of movement is generated within the tripod-mount-lens it's self and is not external to the gear as it is in case 1. You need a good bit of tripod+mount mass to dampen down this type of movement.

SR is for the first case not the second. For the second case leave it off or it might only make things worse.
My best guess.

Last edited by wildman; 06-03-2011 at 01:19 AM.
06-03-2011, 06:17 AM   #28
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,012
Ninety nine times out of a hundred, leaving SR on will make no difference. It's that one shot that will end up blurred. I've had it happen on a few occasions. It almost appears as a double image when it happens. When I posted a shot, a forum member at the time argued with me that SR wasn't the reason but I probably bumped the tripod. I didn't. My experiences have been during fairly long exposures, 1 second and longer. I'll add that I often forget to turn it off and my shots come out fine. Just be aware that it CAN ruin a shot and when it happens, it will probably be an important one. Murphy's Law rules.
06-03-2011, 06:44 AM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,002
I think that it comes down to the tripod and the conditions. There are some tripods that will not move unless there is an earthquake. Then there are other tripods (lighter, travel tripods) that work well, but in windy or other conditions may have a bit of shake. Also, there are always exceptions to the rule.

Anyway, I ran across this review a while back. Scroll down to the "How stable it it?" and sample images sections.Also, you have to remember that if you use the 2 second mirror up function - it disables SR automatically.

06-03-2011, 08:42 AM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
Ninety nine times out of a hundred, leaving SR on will make no difference. It's that one shot that will end up blurred. I've had it happen on a few occasions. It almost appears as a double image when it happens. When I posted a shot, a forum member at the time argued with me that SR wasn't the reason but I probably bumped the tripod. I didn't. My experiences have been during fairly long exposures, 1 second and longer. I'll add that I often forget to turn it off and my shots come out fine. Just be aware that it CAN ruin a shot and when it happens, it will probably be an important one. Murphy's Law rules.
This has not been my experience with the K7 or K5. In fact, almost the opposite. A large majority of tripod shots with SR on will not be very sharp. I haven't seen the extreme "double-image" type of shots, just a notable lack of sharpness, but unusable nonetheless.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, pentax help, photography, sr, tripod
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
disable shutter noise? ukwoody Pentax K-r 7 01-02-2011 07:48 PM
K-7 sends out preflash? Possible to disable? martinlarsson Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 4 05-11-2010 03:54 AM
Disable Flash on K-x GoremanX Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 2 02-11-2010 11:39 AM
Can you disable continuous shooting? Optical Illusion Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 12-20-2009 04:08 PM
K-m tip: quick-disable SR for tripod use dave9t5 Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 05-07-2009 01:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:40 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top