Sony introduces the a9

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I've not encountered problems with E mount lenses in the winter. They are no more prone to problems than any other AF lenses I've had, and I've had quite a few.

I regularly take advantage of the peak of the winter when it gets below -20C and the sea is about to freeze, but is still open and there is sea smoke. In this environment after about one hour of use in my experience the camera fails to control the aperture of E lenses. G, D, etc. lenses have not exhibited this phenomena in my use (except one 70-200/2.8 original copy which got some dirt in the aperture mechanism, and operated wide open on two occasions, easily cleaned). With E lenses the camera can either lock up per se, or keep operating but fail to control the aperture after prolonged exposure to these conditions, depending on the camera model.  This has happened with several camera bodies, including D700, D800, D810. I think the problem is the water vapour freezes on the contacts, but it could be something about the aperture mechanism itself. I initially thoght it was the weather sealing of the body itself but after I've accumulated a lot of E lenses it became clear that the problem seems to be related to them. Offending lenses include the 24, 45, 85 PC-E Nikkors and the 70-200/2.8E. The regularity of this happening is very high given sufficient exposure to open water and cold, humid air. I've tried taking out the battery and put it back in, it doesn't seem to help but mounting/unmounting the lens does allow shooting to continue, even if for a brief time. Anyway, I often shoot in the same environment with a friend who uses Canon 5D series cameras and also tilt/shift lenses and he doesn't have any problems. Canon has longer experience with electromagnetic apertures for sure. I'm not saying Canons don't have problems in the cold - some do.

Personally I do not value E Nikkors over G or earlier Nikkors specifically and don't think the new system is as reliable as the old, in the conditions that I do my winter landscape photography in. I am aware that dust and dirt can jam a G lens and am not saying it is perfect but it doesn't exibit this particular issue in my experience.

I'm not trying to discourage anyone from buying E lenses just that they're not a panacea to all problems, in their current state, and I certainly won't avoid G or other lenses because they're not "E" (I do not avoid E lenses either, if the lens has features and quality I may buy it, just that it is regrettable there appears to be this issue). My experience simply  does not merit such discrimination.  Without doubt the reproducibity of exposure in high fps shooting is improved in normal shooting conditions (i.e. normal temperature and humidity), and the fps rate itself can increase a bit due to the use of an E lens.

Nikon, of course do not claim that the cameras work in the conditions that I'm talking about. They specify 0 to 40C and also put limits on RH. However, for my landscape photography those rather harsh winter conditions are essential to get the effects that I want and I do want to use tilt a lot to make even sharpness in near-to-far compositions. For quick snaps, I am sure the E holds up for most users, but I could be on one spot for 15 min, 30min or longer and a few hours in one area. Unfortunately with the hard part of the winter getting shorter, it is essential that I make the best of what remains available and gear malfunction is rather annoying as it can mean the best shot of the year is missed. Yes, even in landscape photography time can be short. For now, taking off the lens and putting it back on seems to rectify the issue now that I know about it, but I have used this trick only a few times so far and I don't know if it will always work. My suspicion is on the electrical contacts being too exposed in the F mount. In Canons the lens contacts point inwards, towards the camera body. I don't know if this is the difference or if there is something else.

I have to say that this has never occurred on the large bodies (D3, D3X, D5) but I think that's just that I use the more compact bodies most of the time for landscape photography and although the large cameras are well built, I'm not terribly keen on holding them on water for a longer time. They can supply power in the cold for a longer time but again this doesn't seem to be all about that. Of course, it could be a combination of factors: power drop in combination with condensation & freezing both of the contacts and the aperture itself (maybe) instead of just one factor. It may be that the motor that controls the aperture in the body when using a G lens is better shielded from cold and condensation.

[bjornthun]

Ilkka, you talk about Nikon E type lenses. I'm sorry, but I think I confused Sony E (mount) and Nikon E (type). My bad. Too much letters for my brain today.

I hope Nikon will sort out the issue you have. To me it sounds like condensation of water on exposed electronics inside the lens. That would imply that lenses aren't 100% sealed, which lensrentals.com warns against with all brands of lenses.

[Øivind Tøien]

I regularly take advantage of the peak of the winter when it gets below -20C and the sea is about to freeze, but is still open and there is sea smoke. In this environment after about one hour of use in my experience the camera fails to control the aperture of E lenses. G, D, etc. lenses have not exhibited this phenomena in my use (except one 70-200/2.8 original copy which got some dirt in the aperture mechanism, and operated wide open on two occasions, easily cleaned). With E lenses the camera can either lock up per se, or keep operating but fail to control the aperture after prolonged exposure to these conditions, depending on the camera model.  This has happened with several camera bodies, including D700, D800, D810. I think the problem is the water vapour freezes on the contacts, but it could be something about the aperture mechanism itself. I initially thoght it was the weather sealing of the body itself but after I've accumulated a lot of E lenses it became clear that the problem seems to be related to them. Offending lenses include the 24, 45, 85 PC-E Nikkors and the 70-200/2.8E. The regularity of this happening is very high given sufficient exposure to open water and cold, humid air. I've tried taking out the battery and put it back in, it doesn't seem to help but mounting/unmounting the lens does allow shooting to continue, even if for a brief time. Anyway, I often shoot in the same environment with a friend who uses Canon 5D series cameras and also tilt/shift lenses and he doesn't have any problems. Canon has longer experience with electromagnetic apertures for sure. I'm not saying Canons don't have problems in the cold - some do.
...

My AFS 300mm f/4 E PF VR has been working flawlessly at temperatures down to -30°C and lower. It has been left outside for 5 h periods at -25°C during astrophotography sessions with frost buildup on the outer casing - with no problems appearing (the lens is typically stopped down a little during this use so problems would be apparent).

If you get into conditions that cause frost buildup inside the lens that does not sound very healthy for the lens. One thing to consider is humidity that the lens is equilibrated  to inside your house before taking the lens out. I sort of doubt that with the sealing present on the lenses there would be enough air circulation to bring in enough humidity for frost buildup to happen inside the lens. Air at -20°C has very low water vapor pressure (i.e. humidity content) even at 100% relative humidity. So there has to be considerable air circulation for frost to build up; this is the case on the outside of the lens, as with my 300mm described above.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I have not experienced any condensation or frosting of the optical path inside the lens in recent years (many years ago I did have a 20-35/2.8 which did develop condensation inside by open water but my other lenses have not). The images come out normally. I think maybe it is a power issue? Anyway my main suspicion is on the contacts between body and lens since mounting and unmounting rectifies the situation. Maybe in the cold the electronic aperture requires more current than the body can provide? I could ask Nikon service about it, of course.

After returning to normal conditions all the gear has continued to work normally. I have not seen this issue with the 300 PF but I've not exposed it to these conditions for very long and usually shoot it wide open.

[Les Olson]

IBIS is definitely a rational thing to have in a mirrorless camera. As, Ilkka says, environmental pirtraits. Another application is when the use of a tripod is impractical, or simply not allowed. Sometimes even flash photography is not allowed.

The issue is not whether image stabilisation is useful, but whether it is rational to put it in the body rather than the lens when the only advantage of the mirrorless design is simplicity of construction of the body. 

The idea that mirror movement causes vibrations that affect the exposure is an urban myth. The vibrations caused by the mirror end before the shutter opens.  Here is a recording from a D200 (from http://www.aaronlinsdau.com/category/gear/page/2/). 

[simsurace]

The issue is not whether image stabilisation is useful, but whether it is rational to put it in the body rather than the lens when the only advantage of the mirrorless design is simplicity of construction of the body. 

You seem to imply that it is equivalent to put stabilisation in the body or the lens. Why do you think that it makes no difference?

The idea that mirror movement causes vibrations that affect the exposure is an urban myth. The vibrations caused by the mirror end before the shutter opens.  Here is a recording from a D200 (from http://www.aaronlinsdau.com/category/gear/page/2/).

I would be interested to see similar recordings for other cameras. To my knowledge, not all cameras are affected by vibration issues to the same extent. Do you think that Nikon's efforts to improve the D810 mirror mechanism were due to them believing in an "urban myth"?

[Akira]

You seem to imply that it is equivalent to put stabilisation in the body or the lens. Why do you think that it makes no difference?
I would be interested to see similar recordings for other cameras. To my knowledge, not all cameras are affected by vibration issues to the same extent. Do you think that Nikon's efforts to improve the D810 mirror mechanism were due to them believing in an "urban myth"?

The test was done with D200 and 85/1.4 combo attached on the Kirk BH3 ballhead, which means that the body is directly mounted on the ballhead.  The vibration caused by the mirror may stay longer when the camera is attached to, say, AF-S 300/4.0 mounted on a tripod.  The tripod collar of AF-S 300/4.0 is known to be a bit too flimsy.  The mirror shock of D800 could be stronger than that of D200, and its l/mm resolution is finer than that of D200.  So, the shock could be more influential.

[David H. Hartman]

Has the Sony A9 demonstrated that the EVF and electronic shutter are ready for professional sports and wildlife photography? What's your take?

Dave Hartman

I know the lenses aren't available yet but the question isn't about the lenses. It's about the technology in the camera body.

[simsurace]

Right, and also the D800 mirror is probably roughly double the mass of the D200 mirror.

[Les Olson]

Right, and also the D800 mirror is probably roughly double the mass of the D200 mirror.

Which would mean the vibrations would decay twice as fast (all other things being equal).

[bjornthun]

Which would mean the vibrations would decay twice as fast (all other things being equal).

Why is there a mirror-up feature on most DSLRs?

[Jan Anne]

On the D800E I had no issues with both the mirror and shutter vibrations when shooting slow exposures handheld with lenses like the 35/1.4G.

The mechanical shutter on the original 36MP a7R was so violent however that I couldn't get any decent images under the same conditions, this frustrated me so much that I quickly switched to the 12MP a7S when it became available which had both an electronic first curtain, less scrutinising pixels and more ISO range to play with for even more low light fun.

My current 42MP A7RII has the same features plus a stabilised sensor (IBIS), I always shoot it with an electronic first curtain as there are no downsides for my kind of use (the fully electronic shutter does impact noise btw) and rarely use IBIS on lenses shorter than 100mm but it does come in handy with the CV125/2.5.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Why is there a mirror-up feature on most DSLRs?

When using a telephoto lens or macro to photograph stationary subjects on tripod, the mirror shake can cause a small amount of blur that is perceptible when magnifying the image a lot to make a large print.  If one uses a too wimpy tripod or poor head, the effect increases in magnitude.

The shutter vibration also can cause an effect, and so Nikon implemented electronic first curtain shutter in the D5, D810, D500, and now D7500. Using a solid tripod, a good tripod collar, EFCS and mirror up, slightly sharper images can be realized in certain conditions which require a slow-ish shutter speed and telephoto lens.

However, mirror slap is more dampened now than it was in the early days of SLRs.  Tripod mounts of lenses are improving in newer lenses in several cases. And solid tripods are now a bit lighter than they were before carbon fibre.

[bjornthun]

When using a telephoto lens or macro to photograph stationary subjects on tripod, the mirror shake can cause a small amount of blur that is perceptible when magnifying the image a lot to make a large print.  If one uses a too wimpy tripod or poor head, the effect increases in magnitude.

The shutter vibration also can cause an effect, and so Nikon implemented electronic first curtain shutter in the D5, D810, D500, and now D7500. Using a solid tripod, a good tripod collar, EFCS and mirror up, slightly sharper images can be realized in certain conditions which require a slow-ish shutter speed and telephoto lens.

However, mirror slap is more dampened now than it was in the early days of SLRs.  Tripod mounts of lenses are improving in newer lenses in several cases. And solid tripods are now a bit lighter than they were before carbon fibre.

Exactly, my experience too.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Has the Sony A9 demonstrated that the EVF and electronic shutter are ready for professional sports and wildlife photography? What's your take?

I'm obviously not a professional sports photographer but I do enough of sports photography to take the liberty to comment.

The rolling shutter effect is relatively minor but it can be seen in some images. I don't think it will be an issue for most applications.

In high frame rate photography, the viewfinder is mainly used to follow the action, adjust framing and composition. For these things I think the A9 viewfinder should work fine (even excellently). However, shooting at 20fps is quite silly for many situations, leading to lots of nearly identical frames that must be edited, which takes time which the professional sports photographer may not have. So I think it's a headline feature but not terribly useful in most applications. For a golf swing or a figure skating pirouette or other such fast movement, it can be useful. I think the silence has more implications than the high frame rate. If the photographer shoots 20000 frames in a hockey game and has to submit the single best image latest 30min after the game, that's going to be tricky to find the right image in such a short time.

However, when the action is not impossibly fast to time for, I would at least personally shoot in single shot mode as it allows me to give due consideration to the subject I'm shooting and choose a moment based on prior evolution of the events. This avoids unnecessary buildup of masses of images which take a lot of time to edit and allows me to inject more of my personality into the photos without having to do a lot of extra work afterwards. Also it can be that sometimes focus is lost during a high frame rate sequence and by taking a single shot one can monitor the focusing, preventing an out of focus image from happening. I have no idea of how good the EVF is for single shot shooting, as the reviewers so far seem to have been focused on how the 20fps shooting works. In time there will be more reviews and some by professional sports photographers not sponsored by the manufacturer who can give a well rounded opinion without being clouded in judgment by the possibilities of the new technology.

The problem in many reviews of web sites who do such things is that they advertise links to gear on their sites and thus they make money if they can motivate someone to buy new equipment, whether it is in the photographer's best intererest or not. If they have to buy several cameras and a whole lineup of lenses, all the better. I don't think it used to be as bad as it is today; in many cases the switching was openly considered to be unnecessary and not necessarily beneficial in the end.  Now many sites promote frequent switching quite unabashedly. I think the issue is that since gear sales is on the decline, their livelihood is on the line. This is unfortunate and I think it would be better if there were more sites which took a more decent attitude towards these matters. Switching is stupendously expensive for many photographers who have more than a few lenses, and you rarely get a better system by switching unless you really pour a lot of extra money into it, or have very specific needs, in this case it might be whole frame focus coverage, silent shooting or some other feature (eye focus etc). I'm not saying these needs are not legitimate - they are, but the cost is not a trivial matter.

Anyway back to your topic I think for the high frame rate shooting sports photographer the A9 EVF should be fine but time will tell how large a proportion of single shot action shooters would prefer the EVF. The rolling shutter effect seems  minor and I doubt a reader of a newspaper would in most cases notice the artifact. They might, in some cases, but they're not going to sue the newspaper for geometric distortion of the events.    I guess the newspapers or media outlets who hire the photographers will also have some say about whether the rolling shutter effect is acceptable. Perhaps they will just avoid publishing distorted shots and choose frames where it is not obvious. In most cases it seems there is no effect to notice but in some panned shot of a runner it was.