Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] Bad vibes in 35mm systems

Subject: RE: [OM] Bad vibes in 35mm systems
From: "James N. McBride" <jnmcbr@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 14:27:04 -0700
The subject of vibration is interesting and important. I agree that keeping
the camera as close as possible to the apex of the tripod legs is important.
The more the center column is extended the less stable the setup. Obviously
some center columns are more stable than others, but for a given tripod the
more the column is extended the less stable is the camera. A recent issue of
Outdoor Photography had a column, I think by DeWitt Jones, on vibration with
longer lenses. He said, from his own experience, a shutter speed of about
1/15 of a second was the worst for vibration effects. Shutter speeds slower
or faster than that were easier to damp. I suppose the 1/15 speed
corresponds to some natural frequency of his typical setup. He didn't claim
to know why but just recognized the need to deal with it. The surface the
tripod sits on can be very important as some places have natural vibration.
I have some damper pads that can mount under the tripod feet. These are
mostly used for astronomy work and I have not tried them yet. From my own
experience, I find that a tripod isn't always the answer. Sometimes a
beanbag over a rock or other support is better. It is good to get ideas from
the experience of others but we all need to discover what works for us in
our own situations.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Brian Swale
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:50 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Bad vibes in 35mm systems


Hi Zuiks,

I was reading through Dean Hansen's post about the Zuiko 20mm macro and
the problems he is experiencing, trying to get sharp shots with it. And he
has gone to some lengths to avoid the negative effects of camera/lens
vibration.

I've come to the conclusion that with at least two of my lenses, the 100/2
and the 300/4.5, vibration can be a major (read MAJOR) spoiler of image
quality. And it's not all that easy to decide where the offending vibration
comes from; then dealing with it..

I've come to the conclusion that I agree with the writings of my old (now
deceased) Forest Service photographer friend  John Johns (see his book
"Know your Camera") that it is important to have the camera/lens
combination as close as possible to the apex of the tripod, and if that
means
doing away with such devices as tripod heads, close-focussing stages and
racks, then so be it. You may have to decide between your convenience and
comfort on the one hand, and image quality on the other.

In his "Olympus OM system lens tests" Gary Reese repeatedly reports the
benefits of taking several defined actions to avert vibration and consequent
loss of image contrast and definition.

I wonder if Gary can tell us how OM cameras / systems compare in this
regard with other makes?

How lens shutters compare with focal plane shutters.

How OM cloth shutter systems compare with vertical-run metal shutters.

And other heretical ideas.

Brian

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >




< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz