A closer look at Shake Reduction on the K10D


ChrisA

Link Posted 08/06/2008 - 23:18
Don wrote:
my method of polling a larger sample will produce more accurate results than your method of using a tripod, to find out if a steady handed shooter without tripod is getting adverse results.

Well, this is true if whatever you do, also excludes other reasons someone might get better results without SR.

I do accept that my experiments do not show anything about the behaviour of the camera when there is more naturally present shake than you get with a tripod, but less than the average hand-held shooter.

If you're somewhere in between these, and there's something funny about the SR system's response to that particular level of shake, then yes, my tests do not reveal that, nor can they.

However, what you haven't done, is anything that is described in enough detail to be repeatable by an independent investigator. Further, whatever results you've described are from experiments that are notoriously difficult to interpret (hand-held, with all its natural variation; wide angles, where shake is less evident anyway; and wide apertures, presumably in low light with the 50mm F1.4 you were talking about, where it's difficult to isolate shake from blur).

You're making extraordinary claims. This means that you need extraordinarily good evidence to back them up.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but without the evidence, I'm afraid you're just another one of the many, that make wild and implausible speculative comments about the performance of their equipment.

And usually it's their technique, not the equipment. Sometimes it isn't, of course. It might not be in this case, indeed I incline to the view that you're more likely to be seeing something, since you have a track record here of creativity and inventiveness, which I respect.

But we need evidence, not faith.

Don

Link Posted 08/06/2008 - 23:45
My original post was in fact a question based on an observation that I wanted to verify. Not a proclimation of scientific discovery.
But thank you for your time and effort! I do appreciate it.
until I hear others ring in with thier input, I'm done with this.
You did an amazing job with the testing, and if anybody in the future argues with me about sr not causing blur when used with a tripod....I'll refer 'em here.

but you also have me convinced that my solution of turning off sr with wide to normal lenses in low light is right.

we are debating whether or not it is adversely affecting image quality, in an area where it should provide a clear and provable advantage.

if it doesn't provide a clear advantage, where I reach my limits, then I lose nothing by turning it off.

ps
ChrisA said:

Quote:
You absolutely, definitely, will not cause any damage to the camera by leaving SR on.

(advice against manufacturers warning)

then:
Quote:
So why do I say that you should switch off SR for several-second, finger-triggered exposures?

Well, twice I found that with SR on (and confirmed on with the hand icon), and a 2.5s exposure set, a) the mirror flipped up, but the shutter did not open, and then b) the camera would not switch off. I had to remove the battery to get it to switch off. After a heart-stopping few moments, replacing the battery and switching back on restored normal function. This did not happen with SR off under the same conditions. Youíll forgive me if I donít repeat this test too often, though.

(good thing you tested)

and finally:

Quote:
I'm not saying you're wrong, but without the evidence, I'm afraid you're just another one of the many, that make wild and implausible speculative comments about the performance of their equipment.

javascript:emoticon('')

You did everybody a service with your tests.
you displaced a myth about why the manufacturer recomends not using sr with tripod.
You deserve credit for that.
I think, maybe, you were being a little hard me, personally.
But no harm, no hard feelings.
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.

ChrisA

Link Posted 09/06/2008 - 07:50
Don wrote:
if it doesn't provide a clear advantage, where I reach my limits, then I lose nothing by turning it off.

Yep, no argument there.
Quote:

ps
ChrisA said:

Quote:
You absolutely, definitely, will not cause any damage to the camera by leaving SR on.

(advice against manufacturers warning)

then:
Quote:
So why do I say that you should switch off SR for several-second, finger-triggered exposures?

Well, twice I found that with SR on (and confirmed on with the hand icon), and a 2.5s exposure set, a) the mirror flipped up, but the shutter did not open, and then b) the camera would not switch off. I had to remove the battery to get it to switch off. After a heart-stopping few moments, replacing the battery and switching back on restored normal function. This did not happen with SR off under the same conditions. Youíll forgive me if I donít repeat this test too often, though.

(good thing you tested)


Yes, I'd probably withdraw the 'absolutely, definitely' in the light of that. It was strange, but it doesn't seem to have damaged the camera. And the manufacturer's warning is not about damage.

But I'm always glad to review my opinions based on new evidence.

Quote:
You did everybody a service with your tests.
you displaced a myth about why the manufacturer recomends not using sr with tripod.
You deserve credit for that.

Thank you.

Quote:
I think, maybe, you were being a little hard me, personally.

Sorry if it seemed like that, it's nothing personal. Unfounded claims based on lack of evidence drives me nuts. There's a lot of it about, and people believe, and then act on, all kinds of nonsense.
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.