Options

What not to do

SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
edited February 9, 2009 in Technique
Recently there was a tread on this very subject. I was just in the garage a few minutes ago setting up a shot, and I stated to get this as a result, I checked everything, (I thought) twice, still the same result!

OK what's wrong? The lens, the camera? What to do?

Sam
www.samlinvillephotography.com

Comments

  • Options
    SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2009
    OK think now, NO!! don't bang your head against the wall or start wailing, it never works. When they starts wailing and screaming the monster always gets them.

    Did I check the IS? Oh darn it's on. Will turning it off fix this?

    Yep.

    Both shots are not processed. I just wanted to remind others that leaving the IS on can have a really bad result, especially with longer shutter times.

    Sam
    www.samlinvillephotography.com
  • Options
    Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2009
    OK - that qualifies for a WOW. I've read about it and seen it in small amounts, but never like this!
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • Options
    WingsOfLovePhotoWingsOfLovePhoto Registered Users Posts: 797 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2009
    Thank you... i assume that also includes Nikon VR? This fact may have solved most of my questionable on tripod or slow shutter speed shots!
    Snady :thumb
    my money well spent :D
    Nikon D4, D3s, D3, D700, Nikkor 24-70, 70-200 2.8 vrII, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 105mm macro, sigma fisheye, SB 800's and lots of other goodies!
  • Options
    SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2009
    Although I try to remember, I have shot in the past on the tripod with the IS on, and never noticed anything, but the shutter speed here was 30 seconds. I think that gave it plenty of time to hunt around.

    I just posted as an example of the extreme. Under normal use it could easily be responsible for those soft, slightly fuzzy images.

    Sam

    OH, and while we are at it, one more tip of the day. When your making grilled cheese sandwiches, remember to remove those little pieces of paper between the cheese slices before you grill them. :D
    www.samlinvillephotography.com
  • Options
    TangoTango Registered Users Posts: 4,592 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2009
    that first image i will classify as motional art...
    Aaron Nelson
  • Options
    Omar TanOmar Tan Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
    edited February 8, 2009
    wow, can anyone explain to me what happen? I thought IS was supposed to prevent vibration??
  • Options
    SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2009
    Omar Tan wrote:
    wow, can anyone explain to me what happen? I thought IS was supposed to prevent vibration??

    I'm not sure I can give you real technical answer, but I believe there is a small gyroscope type of system inside, and it will try to negate small movements, like hand shake, but if it's on a tripod it hunts for motion to negate, but since there isn't any the IS then becomes the culprit causing the motion blur.

    Note: Some of the newer models can sense when it's on a tripod, and disengage the IS function.

    Sam
    www.samlinvillephotography.com
  • Options
    Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2009
    Sam wrote:
    I'm not sure I can give you real technical answer, but I believe there is a small gyroscope type of system inside, and it will try to negate small movements, like hand shake, but if it's on a tripod it hunts for motion to negate, but since there isn't any the IS then becomes the culprit causing the motion blur.

    Note: Some of the newer models can sense when it's on a tripod, and disengage the IS function.

    Sam
    That's my understanding as well.
    Scott
    My Photos
    Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
    Equipment List - Check my profile
  • Options
    JustPlainMeJustPlainMe Registered Users Posts: 190 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2009
    Okay, since I've got a Sony camera, this might not correlate, but I've been leaving my IS setting on and I've been getting horrible results with long exposures. I look in the viewfinder, everything is in focus, looks great, and then I get crap. Anything from 10 sec----30 sec is always out of focus. I thought maybe the problem was with the tripod, but it's not THAT cheap, it's steady enough that with delay fire, it shouldn't move. I thought maybe my prescription had changed and my diopter adjustment was off.

    Could I ask if you remember the name of the thread?

    I am going to test some shots and remember to turn that option off and see what it does. Thank you so so so much!!! I will be thrilled if this fixes some of my problems. I am such a newbie that I would never, ever have thought that could be contributing to the problem.

    Sarah
    Please ignore my opinions! And if I ask for constructive criticism, please give it to me. I have really thick skin! :huh
  • Options
    DeeDee Registered Users Posts: 2,981 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2009
    JustPlainMe wrote:
    Okay, since I've got a Sony camera, this might not correlate, but I've been leaving my IS setting on and I've been getting horrible results with long exposures. I look in the viewfinder, everything is in focus, looks great, and then I get crap. Anything from 10 sec----30 sec is always out of focus. I thought maybe the problem was with the tripod, but it's not THAT cheap, it's steady enough that with delay fire, it shouldn't move. I thought maybe my prescription had changed and my diopter adjustment was off.

    Could I ask if you remember the name of the thread?

    I am going to test some shots and remember to turn that option off and see what it does. Thank you so so so much!!! I will be thrilled if this fixes some of my problems. I am such a newbie that I would never, ever have thought that could be contributing to the problem.

    Sarah

    I was shooting the San Francisco skyline from Treasure Island with my Sony and blamed the blurred images on the wind, then I read about the Steady Shot (and other camera variations) being a problem on a tripod. Now I remember to shut it off -- just in case.
    http://www.deegolden.smugmug.com
    http://www.twitter.com/deegolden
  • Options
    Village IdiotVillage Idiot Registered Users Posts: 215 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2009
    JustPlainMe wrote:
    Okay, since I've got a Sony camera, this might not correlate, but I've been leaving my IS setting on and I've been getting horrible results with long exposures. I look in the viewfinder, everything is in focus, looks great, and then I get crap. Anything from 10 sec----30 sec is always out of focus. I thought maybe the problem was with the tripod, but it's not THAT cheap, it's steady enough that with delay fire, it shouldn't move. I thought maybe my prescription had changed and my diopter adjustment was off.

    Could I ask if you remember the name of the thread?

    I am going to test some shots and remember to turn that option off and see what it does. Thank you so so so much!!! I will be thrilled if this fixes some of my problems. I am such a newbie that I would never, ever have thought that could be contributing to the problem.

    Sarah

    I believe that the Sony's in camera IS doesn't allow you to see the effect of image stabilization through the view finder like Canon's & Nikon's lenses.
    On a scale of 1 to 10, my awesomeness goes all the way to 11.
  • Options
    JustPlainMeJustPlainMe Registered Users Posts: 190 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2009
    Village Idiot wrote:
    I believe that the Sony's in camera IS doesn't allow you to see the effect of image stabilization through the view finder like Canon's & Nikon's lenses.

    No, you can't, but someone knowledgeable about the Sony said the IS function isn't mechanical, it's a computer algorithm, so it likely wouldn't be the culprit. I'm going to keep trying.

    Sarah
    Please ignore my opinions! And if I ask for constructive criticism, please give it to me. I have really thick skin! :huh
  • Options
    SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2009
    Sarah,

    This way simple to test. Set your camera up in the house, choose a small aperture, say f 16, to get a long, 20-30 sec exposure, and shoot with, and without the is turned on. No need to have an elaborate set up, or to go on location.

    Sam
    www.samlinvillephotography.com
  • Options
    Village IdiotVillage Idiot Registered Users Posts: 215 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2009
    JustPlainMe wrote:
    No, you can't, but someone knowledgeable about the Sony said the IS function isn't mechanical, it's a computer algorithm, so it likely wouldn't be the culprit. I'm going to keep trying.

    Sarah

    According to Sony, it's mechanical and it moves the sensor.
    On a scale of 1 to 10, my awesomeness goes all the way to 11.
  • Options
    JustPlainMeJustPlainMe Registered Users Posts: 190 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2009
    Alright, well, thank you for the advice! I tried two sets of shots, one at 20 sec. f/16, one at 30 sec. f/18, each with IS on and then off. Absolutely no difference. So I guess the problem could very well be with my eyes.

    Anyway, Sam, I will keep this filed in the back of my head anyway---just in case!

    Sarah
    Please ignore my opinions! And if I ask for constructive criticism, please give it to me. I have really thick skin! :huh
Sign In or Register to comment.