Why R5 Mechanical shutter shock so serious? Amost makes it useless.

[docsmith]

Agree with you.
Assuming your backyard birding is fast enough, e.g. shutter speed is faster than 1/500, you will have no shutter shock issue with mechanical shutter.

For general portraits, macro, travel, street, it maybe a problem.

The physical "shock/vibration" is most annoying issue to photography and one of the main reason we shift from DSLR to mirroless. Everyone says the mirror box is stone age old and vibration of the mirror causes blurry image should be thrown into history.

Now the promise is partly gone. It vibrates more than DSLR! Feeling really not so good.

If your R5 is vibrating more than a DSLR, you likely have a defective unit and I recommend you return it. As for slower shutter speeds, I have shot less, but I have put the R5 through the paces and overall, I am very impressed. But, what works for my needs may not work for yours.

If you want a modern DSLR, I did test the 1DXIII before buying the R5 and it was absolutely excellent.

While I have not noticed anything in real world shots, I just shot at a test target both with my 5DIV and R5 in ECFS and mechanical. Out of about 5 shots, I would say that ECFS on the R5 was more consistently the sharpest, but some images were indistinguishable compared to the R5 with mechanical shutter. But, and this is more to my point as I was always happy with the IQ out of the 5DIV, both modes in the R5 had much more detail than the 5DIV. Same lens, same settings, and same set up. So, it is not surprising that I am very happy with the R5 in mechanical shutter. It out resolved a system I was already happy with in terms of resolution. But, at least the R5 I have, by no means would I call this defective and in no way do I feel the need to return my R5.

But, if you do, I recommend that you return yours. If you spend this much money on something, you should be happy with it.

 

[Joules]

No.
I can get razer sharp photo from my DSLR from 1/60-1/200.
At least I can get it.
Now the case is, you can not.

Maybe I missed the point you were making with the set of initial pictures you shared. I interpreted them as showing that you can take critically sharp images when using EFCS at slow shutter speeds, while that's not likely when using the mechanical shutter. But it means you can take sharp images.

I do agree that having to manually switch between these shutter modes is an inconvenience. But that may be addressed with firmware. So my confusion is about what you hope a recall to accomplish.

 

[YuengLinger]

I think it would great if DPP showed which Shutter Mode was used, as well as IBIS. If I'm overlooking these, please tell me where to find them!

 

[koenkooi]

I think it would great if DPP showed which Shutter Mode was used, as well as IBIS. If I'm overlooking these, please tell me where to find them!

I can't find it in DPP, but exiftool can give you shutter sync:

iMac:2020-12 koen$ exiftool  20201212\ 0919\ Canon\ EOS\ R5\ -\ RF85mm\ F2\ MACRO\ IS\ STM\ -\ IMG_2944.CR3 | grep -i sync
Shutter Curtain Sync            : 1st-curtain sync

The stabilization value it reads didn't change when I tested it, it likely is set in a new field that exiftool doesn't know about yet.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I never noticed a sharpness issue but someone who prints extremely large might. I seldom print very large photos so I would not be able to detect the difference.

The default for the camera is electronic shutter, switch to mechanical at high speeds. You can, of course, set it up in the custom C1, C2, etc settings and specify the shutter speed range for each. I have C1 with Mechanical Shutter, minimum shutter speed of 1/500. C2 is Electronic with 1/500 max. I can limit the high speed shutter in that mode. Shutter speed limitations are saved in each of the C* modes.

My default is Electronic 1st curtain and I have not yet found a need to limit shutter speed but I might.

 

[AlanF]

On second thought...I am NOT going to start a new thread. Why further embarrass myself?

I've gone through the test twice this evening. As controlled as I can make it: good test target, tripod, no IBIS, Manual mode, manual focus (using the little green triangle assistants AND magnified verification of their precision), and the two-second delay. R5 + 24-70mm at an arbitrarily chosen focal length of 60mm. I took seven shots each for MECH and EFCS (1/3 stop increments from 1/60th to 1/250th), but just picked three shutter speeds to attach, as they all show the same thing.

The target you are looking at is a 4x6 glossy print. (Which AlanF kindly pointed to for another series of tests--IBIS--which also came up negative!)

My lights were two incandescent 100W bulbs in a copy-lighting arrangement.

Attached images are just a little shy of 100% crops. I'm exporting from LR CC, so it was kind of hit-or-miss to get the right file size for CR attachments.

First, under these controlled conditions, I am seeing a consistent difference, with EFCS being ever so slightly sharper with this body + lens combination. It is possible that other lenses might show more blurring, but I can't imagine any showing less than this!

Second, and most importantly, the difference that I see, zoomed in 100% on my 4k screen in LR CC, is so slight as to be arguably negligible--unless for some reason printing very large 100% crops. The actual difference I'm seeing is nearly down at the pixel level, where some of the edges of the letters are just barely "rougher/sharper" in EFCS than in MECH. With my new reading glasses on and my nose almost against the monitor!

This is why an engineer with CPS kept saying he wasn't seeing anything.

I think I'm getting to the point where I am making peace with my R5. Where I'm tired of looking for problems, tired of testing, and ready to just have fun and profit (eventually) with a great camera, one I am extremely lucky to be able to use!

But, please, anybody else having some well controlled test shots that show more than this, share them!

I've spent the afternoon staring at 100s of those damn charts analysing the IS of different lenses on the R5 and the RF extender. I can't bear to see another one...

 

[Bdbtoys]

I wouldn't mind a new "Mechanical hybrid' mode/option that is manual except for a certain speed range (bonus if they let us define the range).

 

[usern4cr]

I think the main question is, is this an "issue" or is it the normal results that are to be expected? For those expecting the mechanical shutter and the electronic shutter to produce the same result, your expectations are not realistic. Because there is shutter shock...the question is how much and is it really a problem unless you pixel peep?

And yes, there may be firmware fixes possible. My Olympus camera, for example, has a "shutter shock" setting that - when set to ON, the camera automatically switches to electronic first curtain for all shots under 1/320th of a second.

Ah yes, Olympus has a smart fix in the menu - It doesn't surprise me at all. Maybe Canon will surprise us all and drop this feature into a future camera or firmware update.

Since we're now talking about switching the shutter mode between mechanical and EFCS based on shutter speed, I also tried fully electronic - but that won't work for the way I've been shooting. I like to have a button press-and-hold take 3 shots at -2/-1/0 EV and I choose which I like best in post. This works in mechanical and EFCS fine, but in electronic only mode it just shoots continuously for as long as you hold the shutter down. You'd think it shouldn't change how the camera works, but it does. What would really be nice is if Canon would allow a single button press to trigger 3 shots (ignoring whether you hold down the button or not).

 

[Czardoom]

Agree with you.
Assuming your backyard birding is fast enough, e.g. shutter speed is faster than 1/500, you will have no shutter shock issue with mechanical shutter.

For general portraits, macro, travel, street, it maybe a problem.

The physical "shock/vibration" is most annoying issue to photography and one of the main reason we shift from DSLR to mirroless. Everyone says the mirror box is stone age old and vibration of the mirror causes blurry image should be thrown into history.

Now the promise is partly gone. It vibrates more than DSLR! Feeling really not so good.

Here's the logical thing to do, rather than waste time on an internet forum.

Return or exchange the camera if possible. If you are beyond the return period, send it in for repair.

Considering the vast majority of R5 users don't see this as an issue, it is quite possible that your unit is defective. If your replaced or repaired camera does exactly the same thing, then you'll have to decide whether or not it is worth keeping the camera.

That's my 2 cents.

 

[Rzrsharp]

Considering the vast majority of R5 users don't see this as an issue

What it is if not an issue?

Checkout the hybrid shutter mode suggestion above, it's a prompt issue.

It's like your car cannot maneuver at speed between 50-200kmh, unless tow a rock behind to do so.

itchy.

 

[privatebydesign]

What it is if not an issue?

Checkout the hybrid shutter mode suggestion above, it's a prompt issue.

It's like your car cannot maneuver at speed between 50-200kmh, unless tow a rock behind to do so.

itchy.

No it isn’t. The results that have been posted do not amount to “an issue“, the impact on output image quality is minimal and the workaround for those who need it is already provided.

 

[Rzrsharp]

No it isn’t. The results that have been posted do not amount to “an issue“, the impact on output image quality is minimal and the workaround for those who need it is already provided.

I represent myself only.
You?

 

[privatebydesign]

I represent myself only.
You?

Common sense.
Realistic expectations.

I reposted four of your examples, two which you said were unusable and two which you said were perfect. Nobody has been able to tell which is which.

 

[Rzrsharp]

Common sense.
Realistic expectations.

You even don't have R5, please leave the sense to we owner.
Thanks.

 

[privatebydesign]

You even don't have R5, please leave the sense to we owner.
Thanks.

As I already said, no, that isn’t how forums work. And, I am using all the data I can find to ‘prove there is an issue‘ and putting much needed perspective on it.

As has been said, your individual camera might have a fault, but going by the images you have posted that supposedly illustrate “an issue” we have yet to actually see anything that renders your camera anything close to 9n any shutter mode or speed “unusable”.

 

[SteveC]

I'm actually in a situation where this could be critical, so I'm glad this conversation is taking place: Taking pictures of planets at 400mm results in something I'll have to 100% crop down to a few hundred pixels by a few hundred pixels, and any vibration would be quite visible.

But I recognize that's unusual.

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

I'm actually in a situation where this could be critical, so I'm glad this conversation is taking place: Taking pictures of planets at 400mm results in something I'll have to 100% crop down to a few hundred pixels by a few hundred pixels, and any vibration would be quite visible.

But I recognize that's unusual.

Nothing to worry about if you use EFCS for those situations

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm actually in a situation where this could be critical, so I'm glad this conversation is taking place: Taking pictures of planets at 400mm results in something I'll have to 100% crop down to a few hundred pixels by a few hundred pixels, and any vibration would be quite visible.

But I recognize that's unusual.

Nothing to worry about if you use EFCS for those situations

Exactly, for those very few people in rare situations where it might be critical there is already a work around. There is no issue that I have seen evidence of.

 

[SteveC]

Exactly, for those very few people in rare situations where it might be critical there is already a work around. There is no issue that I have seen evidence of.

Yes, but I wouldn't have known about the workaround without this. It's saved me some time at least.

 

[usern4cr]

I've taken a series of R5 test shots on a tripod at 500mm to check EFCS vs mechanical shutter, reviewing only on the playback LCD screen at max magnification - Note this isn't pixel peeping on the computer. What I've noticed:
* I can *not* get EFCS to show any deterioration in large bokeh balls at any exposure speed (all the way up to 1/8000"). I expected to see just the tops of the bokeh ball, but I can't find any change. I don't know if this effect happens at normal focal distances as I didn't test it.
* I do see much sharper images with EFCS than mech. at slower speeds (as expected).
* I don't see any difference in sharpness between EFCS and mech. as speeds get faster (up to 1/8000").
* If I take 3 quick shots with a press & hold of the button in EFCS mode (at various speeds up to 1/8000"), I can get sharper results in the later shots if I use the slower FPS speed (symbol is a bunch of overlapping boxes) vs the faster speed (same symbol + "H" added). So the 2nd mech. shutter of the previous image is still causing vibrations affecting the next EFCS shot at high speed, but not (noticeably) at the slower speed.

YMMV, but I'm going to use EFCS for all my shots now. If I can find any problems with EFCS vs mech. as I pixel peep on the computer then I'll mention it.