Mirror Lock-Up & IS Lenses on Canon EOS-3

rishij · February 24, 2009

As for the EOS 3, at the time it was released, there was no such thing as either of these tripod detection systems in any IS lens

</blockquote>

Thanks Steve. My guess is that since there was no tripod detection system in the IS lenses back then, Canon left it up to the EOS-3 body to disengage IS when it felt a tripod was being used.

And, clearly, it thinks a tripod is using when MLU is engaged since the manual says that for MLU 'a tripod is required'.

Bollocks.

-Rishi

squareframe · February 24, 2009

Really? My, then whatever is the point of image stabilization?

Of course there are accelerations to correct -- the accelerations induced by an unsteady (non-robotic? ) arm, magnified by the magnification factor of a zoom lens!

you are just being obtuse now Rishi. your expectations and understanding are skewed if you think aiming a camera, without viewfinder or LCD, at a point (I am going to take a wild assumption that you have a subject and not a desultory point in space) ... introduces less relative-movement than the pertubations introduced by the mirror.

daniel taylor

rishij · February 24, 2009

introduces less relative-movement than the pertubations introduced by the mirror.

</blockquote>

No... I said the opposite, that your hand-holding introduces MORE shake than the mirror would, but that IS takes care of that to a point at which mirror-induced shake may introduce larger perturbations after IS has already done its job stabilizing handheld shake (well, technically, while IS is doing its job stabilizing handheld shake).

Who's being obtuse?

Are you just tryina pick a fight?

squareframe · February 24, 2009

no, I am suggesting that you use the camera and lens within the limits of its design.

rishij · February 24, 2009

no, I am suggesting that you use the camera and lens within the limits of its design.

</blockquote>

With all due respect, if I wanted to do just that, I wouldn't be here would I?

Progress doesn't result from using stuff within the 'limits of its design', especially when designers are human & don't necessarily ultimately make the best decisions and/or conclusions.

Case in point. Stupid design. All it'd need is a firmware hack that enables a new Custom Function that allows the user to decide when and when not to turn of IS. After all, there's a damn on/off button for IS on the lens!

Whenever processes are automated, there should be options to revert to manual. Imagine if all SLRs now were 'P' or 'Av' or 'Tv' with no 'M'. That would be a nightmare .

-Rishi

scott_ferris · February 24, 2009

Well me being me thinks Rishi is being obtuse and argumentative. Your examples, well the examples you point people to, are not taken with an IS or VR lens, you will get much better vibration compensation with the IS on and no MLU than you will with no IS and with MLU hand held. Unless you don't, in which case do the latter. Accept that you can't use both, it is not a "huge design flaw" most (all apart from you?) people are very happy with the sharpness from their EOS 3 and 70-200. Your mountain shot looks out of focus to me not movement blurred, all of my IS lenses can easily correct one stop slower than focal length/shutter speed. I'd also be surprised if 1/125 second caught mirror vibration, it is generally considered to affect longer speeds than that, like the 1/40 that is the better example you link to. I have a 300 2.8 IS and a 1V, if I can be bothered at the weekend I'll see if you can use both on that.

It just seems so obvious and simple to me.

rishij · February 24, 2009

you will get much better vibration compensation with the IS on and no MLU than you will with no IS and with MLU hand held.

</blockquote>

What about IS on & MLU handheld? Wouldn't it be nice to add that comparison the mix? The reason I don't have any examples of MLU + IS handheld is b/c I can't do that with my darn camera , & maybe no one else can? Haven't had the time to go to the local camera shop and try my lens on a 5D or such... yet.

Your mountain shot looks out of focus to me not movement blurred

</blockquote>

The shots were taken with AEB one after the other (continuous shooting mode), so focus was not adjusted between the two shots. So, even if the shots were out of focus, you can't ignore the fact that EV -1 looks sharper than EV 0, and both shutter speeds should've sufficed for handheld shooting w/ IS. Furthermore, the larger reason you probably think they look soft is probably b/c they're unsharpened Nikon LS-4000 scans (this is before I got my Minolta and/or access to an Imacon 848... so I should rescan)... but that's a moot point, b/c using a loupe on a lightbox, EV 0 is clearly less sharp than EV -1.

Accept that you can't use both, it is not a "huge design flaw" most (all apart from you?) people are very happy with the sharpness from their EOS 3 and 70-200.

</blockquote>

I've had random shots ruined every now and then that I can't chalk up to hand-held movement or focus issues (b/c a separate AEB shot was tack sharp). Perhaps said 'happy people' just haven't noticed or put two-&-two together to figure out that lack of MLU is the problem. It wouldn't surprise me if you, Scott, fell into this camp, as you adviced me earlier to 'just ignore' banding problems on the 5D Mark II and just go out and shoot and be happy :)

And you may be right that that philosophy brings more happiness; I'm not gonna argue that. What I *am* going to argue is that if everybody just did that, there'd be no such thing as progress .

-Rishi

scott_ferris · February 24, 2009

"I've had random shots ruined every now and then that I can't chalk up to hand-held movement or focus issues (b/c a separate AEB shot was tack sharp)". Rishi your camera will refocus between each AEB shot, it is just a sequence, try it with a slowly moving subject in one shot or predictive, most of the shots will be in focus, the only way to know focus wasn't changed is to turn AF off. This could well be your issue, not the inability to use IS and MLU hand held.

You aren't arguing progress, you are just arguing, you often take a non issue and beat it to death, like your spectral (?) analisis of one pixel from an image that also wasn't yours from a camera that hadn't been released and so none of us had even touched. Surely you are not nieve enough to think anything you or I could say in these forums will change one tiniest aspect of manufacturers product plans, let alone produce progress. How many pros and prosumers etc etc have called out/begged for Canon to put a dedicated MLU button on their cameras for years, even now it only comes as a workaround for liveview. How many 1Ds MkIII's are plugged into printers to use the direct print button?

Don't worry, with age you will become more philosophical and make more progress, they are not mutualy exclusive, I am a happy person :-)

rishij · February 24, 2009

Rishi your camera will refocus between each AEB shot, it is just a sequence,

</blockquote>

Sorry, forgot to mention that for these tough focus shots, I focus, then switch to MF, then shoot the 3 shots using AEB. So, no, focus is not the issue.

like your spectral (?) analisis of one pixel from an image that also wasn't yours from a camera that hadn't been released and so none of us had even touched.

</blockquote>

I can see you're a fan of hyperbole :) 5D Mark II had already been released, & many people already had their hands on one, which is why sample images existed. Just b/c you're not a pixel-peeper, don't hate on our kind.

You aren't arguing progress, you are just arguing, you often take a non issue and beat it to death

</blockquote>

If that makes you feel better about ignoring said issues/topics, so be it. Just don't take it out on me.

Surely you are not nieve enough to think anything you or I could say in these forums will change one tiniest aspect of manufacturers product plans, let alone produce progress.

</blockquote>

Yup. CALL ME THAT NAIVE. Actually, instead of begging the manufacturers, I just change/make $hit myself. How do you think Erik developed the Scanhancer? Or how I developed a film holder than holds film completely flat within the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite scanners while not introducing Newton rings, nor anti-newton etch patterns, & not requiring any fluid-mounting bull$hit?

Don't worry, with age you will become more philosophical and make more progress, they are not mutualy exclusive

</blockquote>

Well to that I say:

<ol>

<li>Thanks for implying I'm young. Always a compliment at 29 before I hit the big 3-0</li>

<li>I disagree, with age will come more experience & knowledge that will aid my progress. Not philosophy that will aid ignorance . </li>

</ol>

Cheers, Rishi

steven_f1 · February 24, 2009

Rishi, I had never seen a claim that MLU helps hand held. So I just tried IS with and without MLU on my 5D with 100-400L lens at manual exposure of 1/25 F5.6 ISO100. My 5D (Mk1) doesn't automatically lock out the IS when MLU is activated. I took 9 shots with and without MLU at 400mm. Without MLU 3 of the 9 looked sharp. With MLU only 2 looked sharp. The rest all have various levels of blur.

My results with MLU were not any better than without MLU.

With MLU on I frequently had difficulty keeping the center focus point on my target. My opinion is that on average the shots with MLU had more motion blur in them than the shots without MLU. The only thing I can say for sure is that I am somewhat surprised at how well IS works at 400mm and a shutter speed of 1/25. I have never tested this lens at such a slow shutter speed hand held.

In my experience I have only had mirror induced vibration affect only 1 image and that was on my first very cheep tripod at 300mm. Since then I have purchased a Bogen tripod and have not had an issue with mirror vibration. Not, I have confirmed that with IS on and the camera on a tripod (with MLU), IS will cause motion blur. So Canon's recommendation not to use IS on a tripod is valid.

rishij · February 24, 2009

Actually, I must interject & say something here.

One of the reasons I come to photo.net is b/c I've found a problem, I pose a question re: the problem to try & find a solution; if I don't find a solution, I try and investigate further to find and/or make a solution (or not, if I have better things to do).

Yet almost every time I do so, I get haters trying to tell me to ignore the problem. What possible purpose do said haters serve? What are you doing here? If you're not gonna provide a solution , then either bring up a valid counter-argument and present me with evidence that proves that my problem is not a problem (in this case, show me a side-by-side comparison that shows that IS with/without MLU @ 200mm zoom look exactly the same) or forever hold your peace . I showed you evidence that MLU helps in hand-held shots, and no one's yet showed me evidence that IS reduces mirror vibrations, so it's a viable possibility that my softness is coming from mirror vibrations .

Your suggestion, Scott, that it was a focus problem, was a valid one, so thanks for that even though that was not the case. The rest of your comments though? Useless , and it appalls me that every time I come to photo.net I have to put up with such useless remarks.

One of these days, I'll just learn to ignore them.

-Rishi

rishij · February 24, 2009

Steven F: THANK YOU!

See, now there was an exemplary experiment/post/contribution.

Glad to hear that the 5D doesn't lock out MLU. Even though it seems one wouldn't really use it w/out a tripod from your tests.

Yes IS is amazing. I've had 1/6 of a second hand-held shots turn out tack sharp under a microscope. If mirror vibrations really aren't the problem, then I guess I'll have to chalk it up to momentary hand-held shake/jitter that IS wasn't able to entirely compensate for. More an issue with film than digital, since you can't tell until after you've developed the film :)

I hear you on the tripod thing. So many of my shots were ruined on a cheap Velbon tripod. Hardly any shots ruined after I got my Gitzo. Sad I had to pay $700ish for such a tripod/head, but definitely worth it in the end.

Thank you again Steven for that very valuable contribution .

Cheers,

Rishi

rishij · February 24, 2009

With MLU on I frequently had difficulty keeping the center focus point on my target.

</blockquote>

Steven I'm confused by this. Can you turn on MLU on the 5D such that after you depress the shutter fully, the mirror will lock up and the shutter will open automatically after 2 seconds (rather than you have to press the shutter button again)?

Oh, perhaps you're saying that even within those 2 seconds, your target drifted off center...? That makes sense.

scott_ferris · February 24, 2009

Whatever, it seems dimentia has set in before the big 30 though. Your analysis was of Vincent Laforets pictures posted before the camera was released, nobody had one, when they did you came up with the banding issue and then jumped on the black spots next to highlights issue. I don't see why there shouldn't be a balanced reaction to the fairly pointless, from a photo quality point of view, pixel peeping you engage in. It does not help photography in general and even misinforms and confuses many. As a technical interest, if you have nothing better to do, then fine, but to try to push this stuff as "major flaws", hyperbole to be sure, then I would have to surmise "Are you just tryina pick a fight?" . you are.....

Rishi, go spend a month with the HRH the Dali Lama, then tell me philosophy will aid ignorance, you are just being youthful, and arrogant.

You are welcome, Scott.

rishij · February 25, 2009

Rishi, go spend a month with the HRH the Dali Lama, then tell me philosophy will aid ignorance, you are just being youthful, and arrogant.

</blockquote>

Since I posted my initial question, I've been called:

<ul>

<li>Obtuse</li>

<li>Argumentative</li>

<li>Arrogant</li>

<li>Youthful</li>

<li>Doesn't understand the basic concept of image stabilization (equivalent to: idiot)</li>

<li>Having dementia</li>

</ul>

And you tell me *I'm* being youthful & arrogant?

Seems like the only one(s) who need a month with some Buddhist philosophy would be those name-calling in the first place. Practice what you preach, dude.

I, for one, actually love Buddhist philosophy, was lucky enough to see the Dalai Lama up close, visit Buddhist monasteries & monks & nuns near Tibet, and read lots of Buddhist texts in my time. If I had to pick a religion, it'd be Buddhism, so interesting you bring it up.

But that's not the philosophy I was referring to when I spoke of philosphy aiding ignorance , but good work finding a way to take my use of the word philosphy out of context. I was speaking of your "quit worrying about technical details and go out and shoot " philosophy.

And what of my comments about black dots on Vincent Laforet's videos/picture? Clearly Canon didn't catch this issue until the public (which I'm a part of) pointed it out; then, some of us decided to have a technical discussion about it b/c believe it or not, there are curious folk out there who like to engage in scientific discussion. Some even commented on what the ultimate cause might be and what a fix might be.

What did all this talk/speculation do? It got Canon to provide a firmware update to fix the issue.

So if everyone were like you, we'd still be living with the problem. If everyone were like me, the problem would probably have never existed as it wouldn't have passed by Canon QC.

So what's your point, Scott? Ignorance is bliss? Here I got an idea for you: go write a book on it & title it 'Regress: My Vision for the Future of Progress '.

-Rishi

anov · February 25, 2009

"Progress doesn't result from using stuff within the 'limits of its design', especially when designers are human & don't necessarily ultimately make the best decisions and/or conclusions."

Thank you for sharing this piece of information, and sorry I don't have answer for your "question".

anov · February 25, 2009

"Progress doesn't result from using stuff within the 'limits of its design', especially when designers are human & don't necessarily ultimately make the best decisions and/or conclusions."

Thank you for sharing this piece of information, and sorry I don't have answer for your "question".

scott_ferris · February 25, 2009

Rishi I could answer each and every point you raise but why bother? Stephen F answered your original specific issue with tests, it is no advantage to use MLU and IS.

You didn't comment on the black dots until actual users did, you added nothing to the issue, you have never used a 5D MkII, your analysis prior to its release was regarding noise, not black dots, they were such a quality issue you, and everybody else, missed them for weeks! That is why I don't worry about your pixel peeping too much. If everybody was like you we would all be shooting with film and scanning with your wonderful film holder.

Peace Brother :-) (You sure can type faster than me too.........)

rishij · February 25, 2009

That is why I don't worry about your pixel peeping too much.

</blockquote>

Yet you worry about putting me down for the sake of... making yourself feel better? Hopefully by the time I'm your age I won't be so jaded after having to interact with folk such as yourself to have regressed to being as youthful & arrogant as you.

I'm sure future thread perusers will appreciate having to sift thru your caca to eventually get to the heart of my question & that of Steven's answer. Just like they'll have to sit & read your dumba$$ comments about the Emperor & his new clothes in the Canon 5D Mark II black dots thread (where, actually, I certainly contributed to the discussion by speculating on cause & potential fix, as well as layering a couple of images for comparison of before/after firmware update, adding to the discussion of what the firmware actually did, etc.). Yup, all without an actual 5D Mark II in hand b/c, guess what, this ain't my profession & I don't have $3k to blow on a whim. If you're gonna speak, try and have a point.

If everybody was like you we would all be shooting with film and scanning with your wonderful film holder.

</blockquote>

That's really mature. Comb photo.net for the multitude of posts re: how to hold film flat. Better yet, call Julio & his fluid-mounting company <a href="http://scanscience.com/">ScanScience</a> aimed at holding film flat a sham & a waste of time. Even better yet: call up Fuji & Kodak R&D and call them demented lunatics for still developing new films . My, you get more & more ignorant by the minute! Is that something I have to look forward to too as I age?

Finally, don't wish peace when you wage war . It's extremely two-faced; haven't you learned that by now in your infinite age-ushered wisdom?

-Rishi

scott_ferris · February 25, 2009

Wow such anger! I probably use more film than you do though, just got 100 rolls of Ilford 120.

steven_f1 · February 25, 2009

This will be my last post regarding Rishi's question. I said:

With MLU on I frequently had difficulty keeping the center focus point on my target.

</blockquote>

You Asked:

Steven I'm confused by this. Can you turn on MLU on the 5D such that after you depress the shutter fully, the mirror will lock up and the shutter will open automatically after 2 seconds (rather than you have to press the shutter button again)? Oh, perhaps you're saying that even within those 2 seconds, your target drifted off center...? That makes sense.

</blockquote>

At 400mm at a distance of about 10 feet my target was only about an inch in size. During the 2 second mirror lock up I couldn't see the target and my aim would drift by about 2 inches.

As to how this post has been going, Rishi posted the following about the same time I posted my first responce.

One of the reasons I come to photo.net is b/c I've found a problem, I pose a question re: the problem to try & find a solution; if I don't find a solution, I try and investigate further to find and/or make a solution (or not, if I have better things to do). Yet almost every time I do so, I get haters......

</blockquote>

And then after you saw my responce you stated

Since I posted my initial question, I've been called:

<ul>

<li>Obtuse </li>

<li>Argumentative </li>

<li>Arrogant </li>

<li>Youthful </li>

<li>Doesn't understand the basic concept of image stabilization (equivalent to: idiot) </li>

<li>Having dementia </li>

</ul>

And you tell me *I'm* being youthful & arrogant?

</blockquote>

Rishi, if this happens every time you post it should tell you something.

It takes two to have an argument.

rishij · February 25, 2009

It does take two to have an argument. One, a pixel-peeper , the other a pixel-peeper hater . All this doesn't tell me much more than that, since all my arguments have been with one person (Les Sarile), and now we can add Scott to the list.

The reason I used the plural of hater is b/c time & again on these fora pixel-peepers get caca thrown at them. Not necessarily arguments, just stuff you'd expect from emotional fanboys, not critical thinkers or objective analysts.

-Rishi

15sunrises · February 25, 2009

This is a pretty absurd thread. Also, any test regarding handheld MSU shots is going to have a very very difficult time convincing me of anything. Unless you can have a robotic arm which will replicate the exact movements twice, once with MLU, and once without, there are far too many variables to take into account.

Also, the shots above used to show the loss of sharpness due to lack of MLU with an IS lens also don't show much. Even IS lenses aren't 100% infallible in terms of motion blur. Focus could also be a problem here. I would also say that some of the additional sharpness in the second image comes from the increased contrast as well.

rishij · February 25, 2009

Even IS lenses aren't 100% infallible in terms of motion blur.

</blockquote>

Very true, and the only way to really test what's causing the blur would probably be to shoot the same image a number of times at the same shutter speed, then try this at a number of shutter speeds, then assay for sharpness (all at constant focus, of course, & preferably small aperture to weed out DOF issues).

Then, since we know that mirror vibration is pretty consistent from shot to shot, any softness variation between shots of the same shutter speed would result from inability of IS to counter hand-induced shake. Not from mirror vibration. I guess this would weed out mirror vibration as the fault for softer handheld images when using IS.

Anyway, after being bashed over the head for caring a # of times in this thread, I don't really think I care anymore...

Rishi

scott_ferris · February 25, 2009

Rishi, I don't hate you.

I just don't think the "issues" you stretch to put forward as "major issues" are. If that is the state of the enquiring mind, banal, pointless and argumentative "cleverness" wrapped up as helpful insight where you were studying then I fear for "progress".

I don't post opposite you to make you feel small, or me big, I believe you think yourself to be far my superior, I do it to try to give enquiring folk happening by your threads a reality check. You don't raise real world image quality issues, I just try to point out the academic nature of your comments, people don't need to worry about buying a 5D MkII (despite your three times rumor mongering) or an EOS 3 because it can't do MLU and IS at the same time. Where is the harm, or hate, in that?

Sign In

Mirror Lock-Up & IS Lenses on Canon EOS-3

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in