Using RF cameras has made me sloppy..
Old 11-15-2017   #1
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Using RF cameras has made me sloppy..

On a recent travel shoot I took an M3DS w. a Summaron 35 3.5 goggled (and this lens has severe cleaning marks), a Fuji TX-2 w/ 45mm lens, and my Nikon F6 w/ Zeiss ZF.2 35mm f2.

I got pin sharp results from the Leica and Fuji, but about 1/2 of my Nikon shots were just a wee bit unsharp when looked at closely. It wasn't a focus issue, as in these cases there was nothing in the scene that was pin sharp. No, it was camera shake even though the shutter speeds were quite a bit over the 35mm = 1/30 sec threshhold.

I blame myself for getting sloppy with my technique using an SLR (even one as advanced as an F6), as I just find it so effortless getting sharp results w/ an RF camera. Still, I was disappointed w/ myself.

Lesson learned. Unfortunately not cheaply as I was using Provia!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #2
fenixv8
Registered User
 
fenixv8's Avatar
 
fenixv8 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 139
Huss can you explain further for ignorant fellow here.

SLR require a bit more steadiness than RF at same shutter speed?

Thanks,

Chris
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #3
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Lesson learned.
Which lesson? Use a faster shutter speed? Carefully brace yourself. Use a rangefinder? Other?
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #4
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenixv8 View Post
Huss can you explain further for ignorant fellow here.

SLR require a bit more steadiness than RF at same shutter speed?

Thanks,

Chris
Yep. The RF cameras do not have a mirror slapping up and down.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #5
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
Which lesson? Use a faster shutter speed? Carefully brace yourself. Use a rangefinder? Other?
Carefully bracing myself. My mistake completely. In the past I have had no issues when I did that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #6
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,775
I agree with huss. If you are a rangefinder user you will get into habits that would lead to critically unsharp images with a film slr. Things like shooting 1/30th, shooting wide open. Shooting wide open still yields good results with a rangefinder because the lens is so much closer to the film plane. The amount of optical compensation to get the lens out past the mirror box on an SLR degrades the image more so than with an RF.

Been there, experienced that. SLR's aren't the way to go for me for 35mm but my P67...
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #7
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Yep. The RF cameras do not have a mirror slapping up and down.
But in the first post, you blamed yourself for a sloppy technique. Which is it?
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #8
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
But in the first post, you blamed yourself for a sloppy technique. Which is it?

Sloppy technique that had me not brace myself correctly allowed the extra vibrations inherent in an SLR to result in less than satisfactory results.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #9
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,644
And I thought Leica users believe sharpness is a bourgeois concept.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #10
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
And I thought Leica users believe sharpness was a bourgeois concept.
It is until you try to sell prints!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #11
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,844
I think if I was using sloppy technique, I'd be noticing camera shake (SLR or RF) long before any kind of mirror slap would enter the equation.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #12
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 1,670
Well, I'm guilty.

A recent weekend shoot with both RF and SLR cameras resulted in a bunch of blurry photos from both systems. The RF blurry photos were expected -- late day in the concrete jungle with heavy overcast skies. I bumped the Leica up to ISO 1600, but still only managed 1/15 or so at f/5.6. So, no surprises.

But a good 40% of the images from the D700 all shot during the bright overcast midday were blurry. Some with shutter speeds over 1/125 with a 20mm lens. I had a lot of coffee that day and was noticeably "shaky", but I think it was sloppy technique that gave me the blurs. I use DSLR about 10% of the time nowadays (used to be a lot more) and I just figured short FL and SS above 125 should have freed me from having to worry about camera movement. Ummm. No.

Had little to do with mirror slap. Only the "default" technique I tend to use with RF versus the brain blank I suffered while using the D700. I was in constant motion and just oblivious.....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #13
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is online now
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by rfaspen View Post
I bumped the Leica up to ISO 1600, but still only managed 1/15 or so at f/5.6.
I probably would have chosen 1/60th at f/2.0. Camera shake makes everything less sharp, including the extra DOF you get by stopping down.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #14
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
... The amount of optical compensation to get the lens out past the mirror box on an SLR degrades the image more so ...
That doesn't seem right. I don't know if the distance the light travels has anything to do with it. Individual lens formula may lead to more or less aberration, but it's independent of distance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #15
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 51
Posts: 6,258
I’m using a Canon eos RT with a pelical mirror.
Makes a slr nearly as smooth as a rangefinder.
But yes, XA and TLR even more so..made me more “sloppy with Handholding.
It’s seems so much Easier with lead shutter cameras. The xa and rolleiflex
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #16
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
The amount of optical compensation to get the lens out past the mirror box on an SLR degrades the image more so than with an SLR.
Quite unclear and sounding like fake news of some sort, although I understand that the last words of this sentence should have been "...than with a RF." without any typo.

You may have been a bit too far away from your keyboard while typing this.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #17
nobbylon
Registered User
 
nobbylon's Avatar
 
nobbylon is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nederlands
Posts: 2,683
Must admit Huss, this smells a bit! I can hand hold my F6 easily at the same speeds as my M4 and get better exposures with the same accuracy of focus.
M3 vs F6? no contest. M3 has no meter, can’t use it in water or major dust scenarios and there’s always the risk of curtain or viewfinder problems with such an old camera.
F6, sure it may get low on batteries but spares are easy to carry..
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve always liked my rf’s but they also have limitations.
I agree with you completely, you were sloppy
I’ve said it in the past and I’ll repeat it now, if I was doing a once in a lifetime shoot or trip, I wouldn’t be using a 50 year old camera, cla’d or not. I’d be taking my F6 with a bag load of batteries.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #18
nobbylon
Registered User
 
nobbylon's Avatar
 
nobbylon is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nederlands
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
I agree with huss. If you are a rangefinder user you will get into habits that would lead to critically unsharp images with a film slr. Things like shooting 1/30th, shooting wide open. Shooting wide open still yields good results with a rangefinder because the lens is so much closer to the film plane. The amount of optical compensation to get the lens out past the mirror box on an SLR degrades the image more so than with an SLR.

Been there, experienced that. SLR's aren't the way to go for me for 35mm but my P67...
Depends what lenses you are using. My Nikon lenses are equally as sharp if not sharper wide open than my leica lenses.
I shot my 28 Ais, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 today and after 3 years shooting my M9 marvelled at how sharp and nice the images looked.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #19
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,109
1/15, 40mm taken by my daughter with M-E.



1/8 35mm on M-E taken by me.



With film Leica it is 1/8 I would not hesitate with 50mm lens.

I was recently trying FG-20 with 50E and didn't find it as good as with RF. Due to mirror slap.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #20
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,547
Considering how well damped the shutter in my F6 appears to be that surprises me. Nikon went to a lot of trouble with that camera by isolastically mounting the whole shutter assembly.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #21
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by nobbylon View Post
Must admit Huss, this smells a bit! I can hand hold my F6 easily at the same speeds as my M4 and get better exposures with the same accuracy of focus.
Nothing wrong with my F6. All the fault is on me for being lackadaisical with the handling of it.

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #22
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
 
p.giannakis's Avatar
 
p.giannakis is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stafford - UK
Posts: 2,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Yep. The RF cameras do not have a mirror slapping up and down.
The F6 (and also the F4 and the F5) have a mirror balancer - when the mirror flips up the balancer creates a vibration of equal strength towards the opposite direction to counteract the mirror slap.

I don't have a F6 but it works well on my F4s and F5. The increased weight helps too.

I am not a RF person so i cannot comment further.
__________________
Regards,
Pan


The Monochrome Archives
Instagram



  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #23
nobbylon
Registered User
 
nobbylon's Avatar
 
nobbylon is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nederlands
Posts: 2,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Nothing wrong with my F6. All the fault is on me for being lackadaisical with the handling of it.

Sadly my rangefinder days are done. My eyesight is no longer good enough to manually focus so I’m selling off my Leica gear. Back to Nikon and happy I kept the F6. It’s by far the most capable 35mm film camera I’ve used or owned. I seem to use my iphone instead of a carry round these days anyway.
I’ll miss the smaller lenses on the r/f’s.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #24
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,265
Could it be the lenses?
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2017   #25
Tompas
Wannabe Künstler
 
Tompas's Avatar
 
Tompas is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ostfriesland - Northwestern Germany
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenixv8 View Post
SLR require a bit more steadiness than RF at same shutter speed?
I doubt that.

Anyway, I wonder what extraordinarily steady hands many of you have. I never use anything below 1/250s when shooting without a tripod. With my 50-135mm APS-C telezoom I use 1/500s as a minimum, with my 8/500mm tele at least 1/1000s.

Tompas with the shaky hands?
__________________
-- Thomas
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017   #26
valdas
Registered User
 
valdas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tompas View Post
I doubt that.

Anyway, I wonder what extraordinaryly steady hands many of you have. I never use anything below 1/250s when shooting without a tripod. With my 50-135mm APS-C telezoom I use 1/500s as a minimum, with my 8/500mm tele at least 1/1000s.

Tompas with the shaky hands?
1/30, 1/60 is quite a normal speed when I shoot with RF or TLR (with the normal focal length). 1/15 requires a bit of concentration and practice, but not beyond impossible...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017   #27
Arbitrarium
Registered User
 
Arbitrarium's Avatar
 
Arbitrarium is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 319
Might simply be that the distance from the front of the lens to the film plane (or the distance between your right and left hand) is longer on an SLR (generally) so any shake would be more pronounced, if you see what I mean?

I shoot at 1/8th at night but it's definitely harder the heavier the camera is. I attribute shake more to camera weight than anything else.
__________________
Arbitrarium on Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2017   #28
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,425
Sorry don't buy this. No problem handholding something like a Mamiya 645 at 1/8. Something else is going on and you try to blame it on the mirror.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2017   #29
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,703
The old formula of using a shutter speed greater than the focal length of a the lens is a bit old fashioned and fine if all you do is make 6x4 prints.
I would think nikon would have thought about vibration coming from the mirror by now. Is it not more the case that you shoot a bit more slowly taking more time to press the shutter on the Leica?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2017   #30
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,864
Some, but not too much weight, a leaf shutter, good technique, all this combines to help lower camera shake. Would think a 6X6 TLR could be used at 1/15 if need be. I have a Olympus Pen D, with the 32mm f1.9 lens and a 5 blade Copal shutter with timed speeds down to 1/8 sec. and I don't hesitate to use that speed if I can brace myself. The problem with that camera is scale focus, wide open and closer than 10 ft., well you better get it right, there's not much DOF to cover you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2017   #31
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
Sorry don't buy this. No problem handholding something like a Mamiya 645 at 1/8. Something else is going on and you try to blame it on the mirror.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss
Nothing wrong with my F6. All the fault is on me for being lackadaisical with the handling of it.
................

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2017   #32
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
Could it be the lenses?
Nah, I used a Zeiss ZF.2 35 f2. That lens is a cracker.

I just shot a test roll taking more care w my technique and will see the results tomorrow. Half with the Zeiss and mf, the other half with a 50 1.8g and af. To compare my mf to af as well as holding the camera steady.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2017   #33
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Got my test roll back, and all the pics are pin sharp.
So yup, camera shake cuz of my sloppiness was to blame.

Thankfully - I didn't want there to be anything up with my F6!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2017   #34
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,486
Too many moving parts in SLR. Leica at least had mirror dampers in R6 and later and the early German tanks like sl.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2017   #35
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is online now
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
Too many moving parts in SLR. Leica at least had mirror dampers in R6 and later and the early German tanks like sl.
The F6 has counterweights on the mirror (as does the F5 and I think F4) that balance out vibes much better than any other film SLR.
But that doesn't help if the user has shaky hands like I did!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2017   #36
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
But that doesn't help if the user has shaky hands like I did!
I recommend more coffee. Or, if that's not the problem, maybe less coffee.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2017   #37
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
I agree with huss. If you are a rangefinder user you will get into habits that would lead to critically unsharp images with a film slr. Things like shooting 1/30th, shooting wide open. Shooting wide open still yields good results with a rangefinder because the lens is so much closer to the film plane. The amount of optical compensation to get the lens out past the mirror box on an SLR degrades the image more so than with an RF.

Been there, experienced that. SLR's aren't the way to go for me for 35mm but my P67...
This whole thing seem to me like which is better, film or digital.

Huss has plainly shown that he got carless in his technique with his SLR. I don't know how that would happen just because he uses and RF also. To me, one still needs to brace ones body for steadiness, and push the shutter button correctly. Regardless, I am glad to hear he has worked it out for himself to get better photos.

Nor do I know how the rear lens element being closer to the film plane would default to sharper photos. Even if one agrees that more compensations are needed for SLR lenses, there is no compensation possible for the circles of confusion being more oval when the rear element is close to the film plane. I would think the two things, closer to the film plane, or needing more compensation (which might make the distance factor of no consequence) would be very minor compared to each other, and second, would tend to cancel each other's advantages out.

But I am certainly not educated in lens theory or mathematics, so I could be all wet.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2017   #38
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,293
I appreciate this reminder to switch mental gears when changing cameras.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-24-2017   #39
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
 
noisycheese is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
I appreciate this reminder to switch mental gears when changing cameras.
Good advice there. SLRs and RFs require different techniques and mindset.

I have found that with my M-P 240 it is better to use focal length x 2 or 3 = shutter speed (50mm minimum of 1/125, 90mm minimum of 1/250) for hand held shots. Digital sensors relentlessly reveal camera movement when printing large. If I can brace against something solid, 2x seems to work.

Using a monopod is a great help, too. I was able to get sharp shots in a Buddhist temple in Mongolia with my M240 and 50/1.0 combo at 1/45 using a monopod.
__________________
The Leica M passion: From the inside it's hard to explain; from the outside it's hard to understand.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-24-2017   #40
bluesun267
Registered User
 
bluesun267's Avatar
 
bluesun267 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 217
I think with SLRs it is just the viewfinder blackout that leads to problems with lower shutter speeds, particularly 1/30th and below, and perhaps even higher speeds, though we are perhaps not as conscious of those. Simply: if I can see where I'm pointing while the shutter is open, I'm less likely to move. If all I can see is black, then...

I love both kinds of cameras though.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:15.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.