Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-26-2016, 11:45 PM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,624
QuoteOriginally posted by Fogel70 Quote
I know of a shake reduction system for this, and it works really great for much longer shutter speeds than 1s.
And a bonus is that you don't even need to hold the camera.
I know about it too, but it is big/heavy as a consequence, even if I own one I almost never use it. Too cumbersome.

09-27-2016, 05:02 AM   #32
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,382
This Is A Rant

QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
I'd like to see a test bench fixed to small electrohydraulic actuators (similar to those used in earthquake simulators but on a much smaller scale) where cameras could be mounted and tested. If the shake pattern was fixed, and there were multiple shake patterns to test, then it seems we'd have a method of testing SR to some degree.
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Secret standards which Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax use exist already:
CIPA standard for shake reduction not available to the public: Open Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

I have no reason to assume they are defined in any way differently from car gas consumption standards - 100% in the interest of the consumer and 100% realistically.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I don't know what people trust or not, honestly but basically I know SR improve thing noticably... But on the opposite I don't trust one bit the 4.5 stop thing. Too good too be true and not what I experience... A bit like the car that are rated to consume 3.6l/100km (or if you prefer would do 60 miles with 1 gallon)...
There is a standard means of evaluating the impact of shake reduction. Every one in the world can do it and should end up with similar results.

Step 1 turn off shake reduction and shoot several shots free standing using your normal stance and holding method. For the series of shots, modify the shutter speed in perhaps 1/2 stop increments starting at about 2x focal length and reducing until they get blurry.

Blurry means, when a full frame shot enlarged to 8x10 inch starts showing points of light that are noticibly no longer points (.01 inch was the old standard)

Repeat this with shake reduction on.

Compare the results

What you get is the relative benefit

The problems every one complains about are the following
-They zoom in / crop in well beyond the 8x10 print size without considering what that additional magnification means, and
-They always use the "rule of thumb" of 1/focal length as their starting point, while never considering that a) with crop sensors they need more shutter speed to make up for the extra enlargement from sensor to print, and b) that their technique was never good enough in the first place


End of rant
09-27-2016, 06:04 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,750
I honestly find I get 3 stops with my k3 from a 1/focal length starting place. My stability may be better than normal. It is rare that I can't shoot stationary objects at 1/30th using the DA* 200as an example.

---------- Post added 09-27-16 at 09:05 AM ----------

With shorter lenses I've gotten rather slow speeds to be useable with the k-3 as well.
09-27-2016, 11:46 AM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,624
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
There is a standard means of evaluating the impact of shake reduction. Every one in the world can do it and should end up with similar results.

Step 1 turn off shake reduction and shoot several shots free standing using your normal stance and holding method. For the series of shots, modify the shutter speed in perhaps 1/2 stop increments starting at about 2x focal length and reducing until they get blurry.

Blurry means, when a full frame shot enlarged to 8x10 inch starts showing points of light that are noticibly no longer points (.01 inch was the old standard)

Repeat this with shake reduction on.

Compare the results

What you get is the relative benefit

The problems every one complains about are the following
-They zoom in / crop in well beyond the 8x10 print size without considering what that additional magnification means, and
-They always use the "rule of thumb" of 1/focal length as their starting point, while never considering that a) with crop sensors they need more shutter speed to make up for the extra enlargement from sensor to print, and b) that their technique was never good enough in the first place


End of rant
My K3 is supposed to have 3.5 stop, so I can divide the shutter speed by 11.2. I should then be able reliably to get 8x10" print of still subject with:
- A 300mm at 1/40s
- A 50mm at 1/7s
- A 20mm at 1/3s

With K3-II or K1 so 4.5 stop (divide by 22.4) I should be able to get sharp 8x10" print with:
A 300mm at 1/14s
A 50mm at 1/2s
A 20mm at 1s

I don't get that reliably. It works if I am very carefull and not all the time. It also work better with longer focal length.

I think I can be safe thinking I have 2 real stops and get reliably sharp shots so I can shoot a 300mm at 1/100s or a 50mm at 1/20s without much issue. But even a 20mm shot can't be reliably sharp at 1/7s... I can get it, but not 9 time out of 10.

09-28-2016, 06:06 AM   #35
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 9
Unfortunately the camera holder cannot be standardised or their current physiological state even without alcohol or coffee consumption. The other source of blur is subject movement which will determine the minimum shutter speed to prevent blur.
But i find it hard to go back to non SR bodies. Alternatively think of replacing SR lenses every few years to gain a similar improvement. My new K70 is a genuine return on investment.
cheers Pierre


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, dslr, ii, k-3, k-5, k-50, k-70, photography, sr, sr between pentax
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
M lenses, SR not as effective as modern glass? Surnia Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 10-05-2015 05:43 AM
How effective is SR in the K-5? Malake Pentax K-5 12 12-04-2010 09:40 PM
Is SR effective? flyer Pentax DSLR Discussion 55 04-14-2010 11:41 AM
Pentax SR effective when panning! falconeye Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 03-26-2008 09:32 AM
is SR effective simons-photography Photographic Technique 24 03-22-2008 03:48 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:41 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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