[ogl]

Explain me, please, my problem - I have K200D and have a lot of blurred photos with SR OFF at "border" shutter speed - for example, it's 1/60 for FA43 or 1/200 for FA135. With SR ON - the situation is better. But my old *ist DS with worse mirror slap and lags of shutter was better. I had no any problems to shoot with FA43 at 1/60 and even at 1/50 without any SR. FA135 was better at 1/200 than now.

I think that it's a problem of SR technology.

I always avoid 1/60 for FA43, 1/125 for FA77 and 1/200 for FA135 with SR OFF.

[flippedgazelle]

Explain me, please, my problem - I have K200D and have a lot of blurred photos with SR OFF at "border" shutter speed - for example, it's 1/60 for FA43 or 1/200 for FA135. With SR ON - the situation is better. But my old *ist DS with worse mirror slap and lags of shutter was better. I had no any problems to shoot with FA43 at 1/60 and even at 1/50 without any SR. FA135 was better at 1/200 than now.

I think that it's a problem of SR technology.

I always avoid 1/60 for FA43, 1/125 for FA77 and 1/200 for FA135 with SR OFF.

Maybe you are so accustomed to how the *ist DS operates that the K200D's SR just doesn't work as well for you?

I haven't noticed any degradation of the effectiveness of SR going from K100D-> K2000-> K-x.

[Dr_who]

Maybe it's something in the settings such as max wanted ISO on the k200 is set low. Do you have amy sample images from both cameras to show us examples with so we can see what kind of blur your getting. I'm sure you mean hand held but if you are using a tripod SR should be off anyways

[ogl]

I use Av mode and manual ISO control. I can't show examples of DS and K200D to compare.
Sold DS long time ago.

But, it's my experience for 2 years of using K200D. Try to shoot at "border" shutter speed with SR OFF - make 10 photos and check it - if 90% are without blur it means that someting wrong with my camera. As for wide-angle lenses - I can't say anything.
I see problem with FA43 at 1/60, FA135 at 1/200. Very oftern with FA77 at 1/125.

But my camera were in repair and it has new motherboard now. But the situation is the same.

[sterretje]

I assume your talking blur, not out of focus.

Sorry, but if 90% is without blur at the critical shutter speed, it's the photographer in my opinion; when you get blur in the other 10%, you just did not keep the camera steady enough at those times.

It is not impossible that something is wrong with your camera. If SR is off, the sensor should be kept in place and that might be failing. But in that case your ratios don't make sense (I would expect 90-100% failures)

Put the camera on a tripod (SR off and critical shutter speed) and
a) use a remote and no delay; what is the result?
b) use a 2 sec delay (or 3 sec with IR remote); what's the result?

If 'a' gives a good pictures, it's your technique. If 'b' gives a good picture, it might be a faulty camera (mirror slap or whatever).

I'm not familiar with either camera, so I don't know how they compare in weight and size. It might well be that they handle differently from that perspective and that that's why you are battling.

[alohadave]

Explain me, please, my problem - I have K200D and have a lot of blurred photos with SR OFF at "border" shutter speed - for example, it's 1/60 for FA43 or 1/200 for FA135. With SR ON - the situation is better. But my old *ist DS with worse mirror slap and lags of shutter was better. I had no any problems to shoot with FA43 at 1/60 and even at 1/50 without any SR. FA135 was better at 1/200 than now.

I think that it's a problem of SR technology.

I always avoid 1/60 for FA43, 1/125 for FA77 and 1/200 for FA135 with SR OFF.

Why exactly do you turn SR off? Just leave it on unless you have the camera on a tripod.

[axl]

One thing to point out IMO.
10mpx vs 6mpx.
What appears sharp on 6 may not be so sharp on 10......
Those extra mpx reveal more detail, much more detail. I thought all my lenses were bad when I swapped from K100 to K10, then I realised it's me, my focusing and a whole lot more detail....

[jct us101]

If the shake reduction wasn't working right then the photos would be blurry, not out of focus. The focus mechanism is totally different than the Shake Reduction. Do you have any examples of this though? Are you sure it's not just your lens that is causing the problem here?

[gazonk]

One thing to point out IMO.
10mpx vs 6mpx.
What appears sharp on 6 may not be so sharp on 10......
Those extra mpx reveal more detail, much more detail. I thought all my lenses were bad when I swapped from K100 to K10, then I realised it's me, my focusing and a whole lot more detail....

I agree, that was my first thought as well. In order to get a photo pixel-level sharp at 10mp, I guess you need 0.77x (square root of 6/10) the shutter time that you would need on a 6 mp camera, so if 1/60 is just what the OP needs on the DS, he'll almost need about 1/80 on the K200D.

In addition, it could be the ergonomics of the different cameras. Maybe the OP holds (or presses the shutter) of the DS in a slightly better way? I think it should be possible to get 10mp pixel-level sharp shots at 1/60 or evel slower without SR with the FA43 if you're very careful (keep your arms close to your body, hold your breath, etc.)

[Pentaxie]

I concur with jct us101's comments.
If the SR was swithched on but was not working, the photos would be blurry
If 90% of the time your pictures come out OK, but the balance of 10% is blurry, maybe it is the hand holding the camera that caused it.

It is not impossible that something may be wrong with the camera. If SR is off, the sensor should be kept in place and that might be the cause of it. But based on the comment in ogl's post, the figures do not add up.It should be 90-100% failures.

I do agree with strerreje's proposal :
" Put the camera on a tripod (SR off and critical shutter speed) and
a) use a remote and no delay; what is the result?
b) use a 2 sec delay (or 3 sec with IR remote); what's the result?

If 'a' gives a good pictures, it's your technique. If 'b' gives a good picture, it might be a faulty camera (mirror slap or whatever)."

Try it.

[sterretje]

A resized image and a crop of a specific area will help us determine if there is a problem and if so, what might cause it.

Personally I don't think 6mp versus 10mp is the issue. A 10mp sized to the screen (e.g. 1024 wide) should look better than a 6mp sized to the screen (the same 1024 wide). But I might be mistaken.

[dlacouture]

Well, I'm willing to believe SR can be faulty sometimes...
On some occasion, I had obvious camera/sensor shake in situation where it was ruled out by the 1/1.5xFL rule (I know, I should have disabled SR in this case)...
Once, it was so bad I simply gave up trying to take the pic atfer more than 10 faulty pics in a row... I'm talking 1/180 with a 63mm focal length here, so if my handholding technique is that bad, I should better take up another hobby...
I noticed that it occurred frequently in vertical orientation, maybe that's where the mirror shake is greater?

[ogl]

If the shake reduction wasn't working right then the photos would be blurry, not out of focus. The focus mechanism is totally different than the Shake Reduction. Do you have any examples of this though? Are you sure it's not just your lens that is causing the problem here?

No. My lenses works fine. I think that sensor is not fasten tough in Pentax SR system and when SR OFF - it causes such problem.

[falconeye]

I think that sensor is not fasten tough in Pentax SR system and when SR OFF - it causes such problem.

This is rapidly becoming an urban legend now.

And being close to Oleg_V and DPR means you're probably infected by now. Don't forget, it started with a few broken K-x cameras. And there are cameras with broken SR as I know from a trusted Pentax dealer here in Germany...

Because you are the person making such claims (sensor is not attached stationary enough), you're now in charge to provide evidence.

I give you a hint what to do next:

1. Find a rock and securely screw your camera to it (no, a tripod isn't good enough as shown by many, incl. P. Smith).

2. Make your photo with ~1/100s, varying MLU/LV/remote and SR on/off.

3. Make your photo with a flash, at maybe 1/10s and traling curtain flash sync. This should yield about the absolute minimal motion blur possible, even if the sensor is loose.

4. If there is a difference between 2 and 3, rule out other causes than a loose sensor first. I.e., then the difference with MLU should be smaller (no mirror slap air pressure wave).


After you've done your homework, come back and create the thread you just did.

Of course, P. Smith with his admirable work did it for you already.

He found that there is a difference between #2 with MLU on/off of 0.8 - 1.1 µm depending on orientation and SR on or off. I assume the flash method to reveal about the same difference between #3 and #2 MLU on. But I will await your test

So, what we know is that the sensor moves at most by about 1µm due to mirror slap. This is much less than you would ever be able to notice, ogl.

[gazonk]

Because you are the person making such claims (sensor is not attached stationary enough), you're now in charge to provide evidence.

I give you a hint what to do next:

But the first and very simple task would be to tell us how he judges the pictures as motion-blurred. By looking at them at 100%? If so, see my previous post.