Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > DSLR harder to handhold than P&S?

Reply
Thread Tools

DSLR harder to handhold than P&S?

 
 
Derek Fountain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many landscape
shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for example, 1/50sec
I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's blurred with the 8MP
20D.

The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is sharper),
so perhaps this is to be expected?

--
The email address used to post is a spam pit. Contact me at
http://www.derekfountain.org : <a
href="http://www.derekfountain.org/">Derek Fountain</a>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J. Littleboy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005

"Derek Fountain" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:42525901$0$29785$(E-Mail Removed) eenews.net...
> Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many

landscape
> shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for example, 1/50sec
> I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's blurred with the 8MP
> 20D.
>
> The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is sharper),
> so perhaps this is to be expected?


The extra weight of the dSLR should help, but the mirror should hurt.

Here's how to test it. Pick an (equivalent) focal length, e.g. 100mm. Set
your P&S camera lens to that length and take 20 shots at 1/25, 20 at 1/50,
and 20 at 1/100. Repeat for the dSLR. Compare every shot to a standard shot
taken on a sturdy tripod for sharpness and determine what percentage are
sharp at each shutter speed.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Derek Fountain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
> The extra weight of the dSLR should help, but the mirror should hurt.

For some reason I'd assumed the mirror action wouldn't really have much
effect on the photograph. Once you guys had told me what mirror lockup was
(see threads passim) I kind of thought "deal with that if I ever see it."
Are you telling me it should be a consideration for most shots? I'd already
figured more frequent use of a tripod is in order, so perhaps I'd better
get used to this mirror lockup feature!

> Here's how to test it. Pick an (equivalent) focal length, e.g. 100mm. Set
> your P&S camera lens to that length and take 20 shots at 1/25, 20 at 1/50,
> and 20 at 1/100. Repeat for the dSLR. Compare every shot to a standard
> shot taken on a sturdy tripod for sharpness and determine what percentage
> are sharp at each shutter speed.


OK, thanks. That's tomorrow's project.

--
The email address used to post is a spam pit. Contact me at
http://www.derekfountain.org : <a
href="http://www.derekfountain.org/">Derek Fountain</a>
 
Reply With Quote
 
David Littlewood
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
In article <42525901$0$29785$(E-Mail Removed) ws.net>,
Derek Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many landscape
>shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for example, 1/50sec
>I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's blurred with the 8MP
>20D.
>
>The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is sharper),
>so perhaps this is to be expected?
>

Any SLR (whether digital or film) will have an advantage and a
disadvantage compared with a P&S. The advantage is that the camera is
significantly heavier; this gives it a higher moment of inertia
(effectively, resistance to twisting). Up to a point, this will help
prevent shake; the "point" is where it gets so heavy it makes your
muscles tremble. (Note that in rifle target shooting a heavy gun is
preferred; in fact there are *maximum* weight limits for competition to
limit the advantage.)

The disadvantage is of course the mirror slap which others have
mentioned. However, modern designs are very well damped, and the effects
of this are not as great as they were 20-30 years ago.

The often quoted limit for hand holding (1/focal length in mm) is
historically related to 35mm cameras. A reduced-sensor DSLR like the 20D
actually magnifies the image rather more than a 35mm SLR, so the effects
of shake will also be magnified. I agree this will not apply to a
comparison with a digital P&S. However, I recommend that wherever
possible one should use the next-higher speed or faster. Thus at 50mm
focal length, use 1/100 or 1/125. Or, of course, use an IS lens if
available.

Finally, most DSLRs by default apply little or no in-camera sharpening,
whereas most P&S digitals apply rather a lot. Thus, the unprocessed
results from the DSLR can often look softer. Make sure you are comparing
like with like.

To get to the bottom of the issue, David Littleboy's suggestion is good.
However, do bear in mind the sharpening issue above when evaluating the
results, and either switch off the sharpening from the compact, or apply
optimum sharpening to the DSLR images.

David
--
David Littlewood
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed Ruf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:23:46 +0800, in rec.photo.digital Derek
Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many landscape
>shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for example, 1/50sec
>I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's blurred with the 8MP
>20D.
>
>The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is sharper),
>so perhaps this is to be expected?



Besides David's comments, are you viewing the comparative images at
the same size or 1:1? Could the additional resolution be capturing
enough additional detail to allow you to see the blurring?
__________________________________________________ ______
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ((E-Mail Removed))
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://EdwardGRuf.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed Ruf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 07:35:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital Ed Ruf
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Besides David's comments, are you viewing the comparative images at
>the same size or 1:1? Could the additional resolution be capturing
>enough additional detail to allow you to see the blurring?


Also, remember P&S cameras typically process their images more in
terms contrast and sharpening. So if you are comparing default auto
jpeg this may also be a factor w.r.t. the dslr images not appearing as
sharp.
__________________________________________________ ______
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ((E-Mail Removed))
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://EdwardGRuf.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005


>
> The disadvantage is of course the mirror slap which others have mentioned.
> However, modern designs are very well damped, and the effects of this are
> not as great as they were 20-30 years ago.


Very true, took a group photo for a friend on the weekend with an old Pentax
ME, the thunk when it took a shot was huge compared to my Pentax *ist Ds.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mick Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
Ed Ruf <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:23:46 +0800, in rec.photo.digital Derek
> Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many
>>landscape shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for
>>example, 1/50sec I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's
>>blurred with the 8MP 20D.
>>
>>The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is
>>sharper), so perhaps this is to be expected?

>
>
> Besides David's comments, are you viewing the comparative images at
> the same size or 1:1? Could the additional resolution be capturing
> enough additional detail to allow you to see the blurring?
> __________________________________________________ ______
> Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ((E-Mail Removed))
> See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
> http://EdwardGRuf.com
>


I wll go out on a limb here and suggest maybe a back focus issue. In your
shots does it appear that the back ground is in focus but the main subject
is soft?

I use Nikon gear and have occasionally moved the focus point and not
noticed, making the camera focus on items away from the main subject.

Mick Brown
www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown
 
Reply With Quote
 
Joseph Meehan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
Derek Fountain wrote:
> Since I got my 20D I've noticed more blur than I'd expect in many
> landscape shots. I attribute this to camera shake. I notice at, for
> example, 1/50sec I can get a clear picture with a 4MP P&S, but it's
> blurred with the 8MP 20D.
>
> The DSLR is heavier, and of course it has more pixels (and so is
> sharper), so perhaps this is to be expected?


That is one reason I always suggest actually picking up the camera you
are considering buying and work all the controls. Some cameras just fit
better than others. What fits me may not fit you. Many years ago when I
sold cameras retail, I quickly learned that young children and older adults
need larger cameras with larger buttons. They will be happier with them and
they will get better photos.

That is an oversimplification for your question but it still applies.
Some people will do better with one camera than another. While general size
is a good indicator it is only part of the story so it means checking each
camera for each user.

As for your issue. As noted mirror slap can play a role, but it is
usually small at normal speeds. I suggest the following practice:

Buy one of those cheap laser pens. Tape it to the camera so it will
shine on the wall which will be your subject. Now practice and watch the
movement of the light. You want to reduce the movement. Note: cameras with
mirrors are designed to prevent shake before and during the exposure, but
not after so this test may not work all that well unless you lock the mirror
up.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia's Muire duit


 
Reply With Quote
 
Philip Homburg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-05-2005
In article <iPu4e.932$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Pete D <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> The disadvantage is of course the mirror slap which others have mentioned.
>> However, modern designs are very well damped, and the effects of this are
>> not as great as they were 20-30 years ago.

>
>Very true, took a group photo for a friend on the weekend with an old Pentax
>ME, the thunk when it took a shot was huge compared to my Pentax *ist Ds.


Did you set the shutter speed to bulb? At least in older Nikons there is
quite a bit of shake when the mirror is released after the exposure.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why are HDD platters harder than the floppy/ZIP discs? GreenXenon Computer Support 42 06-26-2009 03:21 AM
Why are HDD platters harder than the floppy/ZIP discs? GreenXenon Computer Security 26 06-26-2009 03:21 AM
Preprocessor harder to write than parser? Peter Ammon C Programming 1 07-14-2007 10:49 AM
70-291 harder than 70-291 FinalHokage MCSA 8 04-11-2006 10:35 AM
It's harder than I though to stick with OO Marc Twain Java 3 11-21-2003 06:00 PM



Advertisments