Image Stability problem with E-P2?

[harold_gough]

<p>See the upper of the two images posted on 17 November and the comments arising, which continue on page 2<br>

<a href="http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15136&start=0">http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15136&start=0</a><br>

Does anyone recognise this/know the remedy?<br>

The lens was a Tamron SP 90mm f2.5 MF operating the diaphragm as a preset, the shutter speed 1/80 second and the ISO 200. Photographing conditions were fairly ideal and unrushed. The battery was nearly discharged but no warning yet given.</p>

 

[Greg M]

<p>I did not read every single post to see if this was brought up, but if you had IS turned on, did you have the correct focal length dialed in the system since this was not a lens that would send that information to the camera? I know if you use the in-camera IS system and an incorrect focal length is set, the system will do some funky things to image files.</p>

[harold_gough]

<p>Thanks, Greg.<br>

I have never done that and have had no (detected) problem, in several months of use, until today, even at much slower (1/20) shutter speeds. It can't cause any harm not to do so. I will dial it in and see if I can reproduce the effect.</p>

<p> </p>

[maury_cohen]

<p>In general I.S. can help, but is not a guarantee of sharper images. If the camera is on a tripod or braced well, I.S. can actually work against getting the sharpest possible image.</p>

[harold_gough]

<p>Thanks, Maury.<br>

I am aware of that principle. As I was resting my hands on the ground might it be possible that it was too much like a tripod stability? If so, why might it be only vertical displacement?<br>

The focal length showing in the menu was 300mm. Intuitively, that would give better stability than for 90mm but that is too simple to be the case. Anyway, I have set it to 90mm.</p>

 

[maury_cohen]

<p>"As I was resting my hands on the ground might it be possible that it was too much like a tripod stability?" <br>

Yes; I might think so.</p>

[harold_gough]

<p>Thanks for your comments.<br>

I have looked at other images from the same session and cannot identify focal length setting or shutter speed as consistent causes. Also, the images in which this was identified were two of the first of a series of nearly 60 shots, the last of which were taken at lower shutter speeds, such that battery drain was not the cause. (See original link or details). This leaves the tripod-like grip the main contender at the moment.</p>

[harold_gough]

<p>Today I seem to have, accidentally, confirmed that the tripod effect is the cause. Details can be seen via the original link.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Harold:</p>

<p>My guess would be that you're discovering the limitations of image stabilization. Most IS systems are optimized for side-to-side or up-and-down movement. In general, the closer the subject, the less effective the stabilization.</p>

<p>Very few cameras/lenses also compensate for angular movement, which will cause blurring effects at closer distances. </p>

<p>Eric</p>