[BarryE]

Related to the supposed shutter shake on the D-FA 28-105/K1 combination, but NOT specifically.

I've never really bothered with ES, never felt the need. So question: what are the downsides of using ES ? I rarely use fast shutter speeds.

I assume an advantage of ES of mechanical are: fewer vibrations; less wear and tear on the mechanical parts.

Maybe if I had/or sometime purchase a D-FA 28-105 as a walkabout lens, I'd just dedicate a user mode to it with ES and provided the ES downsides are not significant, then I'd never have to be bothered by these reported vibrations.

Come to think of it, I take most of my shots on a tripod, with SR off, MUP and use remote. Why would I just not use ES always ?

Thanks

[UncleVanya]

In many cameras the ES is subject to rolling shutter effects with motion. This leads to curved poles and weird artifacts in moving the camera or the object during the shot. The effective shutter speed and the actual time the shutter takes to fully fire are also different in these cases. For example on the Q series I think the ES takes 1/13 second to fully read the sensor even at higher shutter speeds. Effectively this means that anything moving fast enough to blur at 1/13th may also show some odd motion effects distorting geometry but appear sharp.

Electronic Shutter Vs. Mechanical Shutter | Pros & Cons | SLR Lounge

[Bob 256]

Much like having a vertical traveling focal plane shutter which has a small slit but traverses the film (using old tech for this example) over a long period of time. Each section of the film would be exposed for a short time (e.g. 1/1000 s) but the top of the frame would be exposed long before (or after) the bottom of the frame. You get high effective shutter speed but poor time correlation between different areas in the frame. Mechanical shutters still have that problem but there may be only a 1/250th of a second difference across the frame with modern FP shutters. As in the case UncleVanya mentioned, 1/13th of a second is much more significant in the case of moving objects.

[clackers]

Recommend not to use with moving objects, flash, certain kinds of ambient lighting (eg some fluorescent tubes), need to use Live View, restricted to slower manual or CDAF focus methods ...

Upside, by going Live View you're doing away with the mirror shock, so ES also rules out the shutter shock.

Your modus operandi means it should probably be your default, Barry.

[Paul the Sunman]

You lose SR.

[Digitalis]

you're limited to 36 shots.

[BarryE]

Recommend not to use with moving objects, flash, certain kinds of ambient lighting (eg some fluorescent tubes), need to use Live View, restricted to slower manual or CDAF focus methods ...

Upside, by going Live View you're doing away with the mirror shock, so ES also rules out the shutter shock.

Your modus operandi means it should probably be your default, Barry.

Thanks, Clackers personally I struggle with LV. The ambient light causes me problems, even with a loupe. And I find I can't compose properly with it compared to the OVF - maybe that is practice. Also, as I've take to having to wear reading specs, I don't need them for the OVF, but I do with LV detail, so that makes the OVF better.

I do use LV occasionally, eg when I re-position the centre spot for focusing (my default is spot) and then be bothered to switch make to manual to check everything before firing the remote. Slooow photography

---------- Post added 12-22-17 at 09:04 AM ----------

In many cameras the ES is subject to rolling shutter effects with motion. This leads to curved poles and weird artifacts in moving the camera or the object during the shot. The effective shutter speed and the actual time the shutter takes to fully fire are also different in these cases. For example on the Q series I think the ES takes 1/13 second to fully read the sensor even at higher shutter speeds. Effectively this means that anything moving fast enough to blur at 1/13th may also show some odd motion effects distorting geometry but appear sharp.

Electronic Shutter Vs. Mechanical Shutter | Pros & Cons | SLR Lounge

Thank you, that's informative.

---------- Post added 12-22-17 at 09:05 AM ----------

Much like having a vertical traveling focal plane shutter which has a small slit but traverses the film (using old tech for this example) over a long period of time. Each section of the film would be exposed for a short time (e.g. 1/1000 s) but the top of the frame would be exposed long before (or after) the bottom of the frame. You get high effective shutter speed but poor time correlation between different areas in the frame. Mechanical shutters still have that problem but there may be only a 1/250th of a second difference across the frame with modern FP shutters. As in the case UncleVanya mentioned, 1/13th of a second is much more significant in the case of moving objects.

Thanks Bob, more useful info

---------- Post added 12-22-17 at 09:06 AM ----------

You lose SR.

Thanks Paul, I forgot that. As a 99% tripod photographer I rarely use it...

[clackers]

Thanks, Clackers personally I struggle with LV. The ambient light causes me problems, even with a loupe. And I find I can't compose properly with it compared to the OVF - maybe that is practice. Also, as I've take to having to wear reading specs, I don't need them for the OVF, but I do with LV detail, so that makes the OVF better. .

Because the KP introduced ES for the OVF without many complaints, it's possible that a future firmware upgrade will make this possible on the K-1, too.