Sigma 100-400mm for BIF?

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, jaapv said:

p

 Because it is precisely the second curtain that produces a rolling shutter effect, like it does on film. Nomen est omen. There are beautiful examples from the early 20th century when the curtains were relatively slow. As the shutter roll-off speed increased the effect got mitigated, never disappeared completely but lost its impact, and it poked up its head again when the (slow) rolling readout of sensors enabled extremely short "shutter times" simulation and added the multiplication effect to geometrical distortion.

 

<snip>

public domain

I understand. In my book, if an effect is not observable, then from a practical point of view, it is not there. The rolling shutter effect is not noticeable in DSLRs and electronic shutters with fast readout speeds (e.g., A9).

[SrMi]

11 hours ago, michali said:

I've noticed this issue with both the SL2 & CL, I also had the same issue with the Sony A7r some years ago. When I had the S1R I also complained of similar issues with the VE90-280 SL. There's been a marked improvement in image quality & sharpness with the Electronic Shutter. I haven't noticed any artefacts or other issues when using the Electronic Shutter (both with  the SL2 & CL) when shooting outdoors in natural light.

Here's a test I did back in Nov. when I first used the Sigma 100-400mm.

 

 

Yes, a similar issue exists with 90-280. A year ago, I wrote this to Leica technical support, which forwarded the matter to Leica headquarter, but there was no response:

I have tested SL2 with Vario Elmar 90-280 at close and far distance with focal length at 200mm. The shutter speed used was 1/60, 1/100, and 1/125; the subject distance was close and far. Shooting handheld with stabilization switched on. I noticed that the image quality with the mechanical shutter was visibly lower than with the electronic shutter (for all shutter speeds).

[LocalHero1953]

Agree. Most electronic shutters take 1/20-1/60s to read across the sensor, even if the exposure per pixel is 1/16000. And you would normally want faster than 1/60s for BIF.

Edited January 24, 2021 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

31 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I understand. In my book, if an effect is not observable, then from a practical point of view, it is not there. The rolling shutter effect is not noticeable in DSLRs and electronic shutters with fast readout speeds (e.g., A9).

Agree Nor is it visible in BIF with ES.

[SrMi]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Agree Nor is it visible in BIF with ES.

Yes, I was wrong in my post #12 (except for the extreme hummingbird photography). I believe your point, which I agree with, is that the rolling shutter issue has been exaggerated.
The other misconception is that you cannot handhold a camera with an electronic shutter because of the slow sensor readout speed (< 1/15 sec?).

[jaapv]

37 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Agree. Most electronic shutters take 1/20-1/60s to read across the sensor, even if the exposure per pixel is 1/16000. And you would normally want faster than 1/60s for BIF.

Yes, but the image is not exposed at 1/60th... It consists of more than one pixel .  Nor would you want  1/16000th, really, not even with a Lanner falcon.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wonder whether this discussion is not a bit moot, since the OP was asking specifically about BIF (at least that is what the title suggests) and I would hazard a guess that the SL cameras do not have an AF system up to the task anyway. A field where the complete Fuji X-system and both Canon and Nikon have problems except for the latter's respective top two models, and where only Sony seems to really excel and Panasonic do not play at all, surely Leica stands on the edge of the pitch and takes wonderful stills of sitting hedgehogs.

[drjonb]

SL2-S and Sigma 60-600 L mount

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[drjonb]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[drjonb]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, JohnSmithsOtherBrother said:

A field where the complete Fuji X-system and both Canon and Nikon have problems except for the latter's respective top two models, and where only Sony seems to really excel and Panasonic do not play at all, surely Leica stands on the edge of the pitch and takes wonderful stills of sitting hedgehogs.

I agree that the top Canon and Nikon bodies are ideal for this type of photography. This has been the case for the past 50 years. That being said, I don't think that Leica and other brands "do not play at all." I'm sure that the many photographers who have posted excellent images in this thread, and in others, would disagree as well.

We often get carried away by perceived equipment limitations, as-if you couldn't drive to the grocery store in anything less than a Paris-Dakar off-road racer. 99% of the work is done by the photographer, not the equipment. Having slightly faster AF won't help you if you don't know where to point the camera, or if you don't have the patience and vision to get the images that you want. Sure, if you are a professional, that extra 1% could allow you to make your rent payment, or take your spouse out for a lovely meal, but it does not mean that you don't have to put-in the hard work necessary to improve your craft.