Mike Usher wrote
>>>Exactly. With the latest firmware, the E-M1 now has conquered
shutter shock (SS) and the newer bodies do so too, including one EFC.
But none of that matters for landscape work.
I agreed with almost everything but SS can intrude at speeds used for
landscapes depending on the exact set up/lens. One can be sure that an
EFC will eliminate that and the anti-shock delay will mitigate it but
it is not clear to me that it is 100% eliminated. Have not run across
any Imatest type analysis to be certain. If I wanted to be sure to
have maximal resolution for large prints, would use a shot filled bag
or be sure to have an EFC option.
This type of analysis with various anti shock delay would be
interesting:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=5402
No shock, Mike
.....................................
Thanks for the thoughts.
I have found that when doing macro shots with manual
OM lenses and the E-3, <something> which I concluded
is either shutter or mirror shock, significantly degraded
images shot at 1/10 second and slower ( and maybe
faster - do not remember).
Why did I not up the ISO? Digital noise.
As far as I recall, having ISO made no significant
difference - but I did NOT do tests specifically to decide
which.
The downside of having the E-3 mirror significantly larger
than the E-1 mirror is the pronounced mirror slap. Can't
feel it with the E-1, but it is quite obvious with the E-3.
Why they didn't design in a suitable counterweight beats
me.
Brian
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|