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

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
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!
 

Attachments

  • MECH 60TH.jpg
    MECH 60TH.jpg
    382.3 KB · Views: 105
  • EFCS 60TH.jpg
    EFCS 60TH.jpg
    399.5 KB · Views: 115
  • EFCS 100TH.jpg
    EFCS 100TH.jpg
    403.1 KB · Views: 105
  • MECH 100TH.jpg
    MECH 100TH.jpg
    387 KB · Views: 103
  • EFCS 125TH.jpg
    EFCS 125TH.jpg
    405.4 KB · Views: 102
  • MECH 125TH.jpg
    MECH 125TH.jpg
    390.3 KB · Views: 86
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
View attachment 194513
You can not explain why 1/60s is better than 1/100s following your SLR shutter speed rules which sounds like trying to skip the shutter shock issue to me.
Actually that´s very easy to explain! :D user variable! Sometimes you get blurry images in 1/60 and better with 1/100, or better at 1/60 and worse at 1/100.... :D It just depends how many coffees you have drink!

Ok...seriously. I am not saying that there is no issue, but honestly, I don´t see a big of a problem here...But that´s just me. I guess I am a lucky guy because I didn´t notice anything bad in my R5 but as soon I have some time I will test this. Like said before, I had in the past a camera with severe shutter-shock, it was the Canon 7D mkII. Canon never recognized the problem so i solved the problem...by selling the camera. :) If you are experiencing those issues you should adress Canon and see what they tell about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jan 29, 2011
10,675
6,121
Excellent work YuengLinger, and I am happy you are making peace with your R5. All I was ever trying to do was put the differences into perspective, never deny there were some, and I am very pleased you were open minded enough to not just blow me off.

And I know it is not ideal but the truth is judicious optimal sharpening will reduce the differences even more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
Thanks, PBD, once again for helpful suggestions.

I took the attached shot this morning walking with the family. People are flying again! I'm so glad I never worried about evil contrails!

I'd rather be taking pictures of the sky than anymore test charts for a while, thank you. Cheers, all, and happy, sane, healthy holidays. Go ahead, yearn for a more normal New Year. Don't we deserve it?
 

Attachments

  • Red Maple.jpg
    Red Maple.jpg
    945.4 KB · Views: 86
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
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!
Did you test on tripod?
 
Upvote 0
Actually that´s very easy to explain! :D user variable! Sometimes you get blurry images in 1/60 and better with 1/100, or better at 1/60 and worse at 1/100.... :D It just depends how many coffees you have drink!

Ok...seriously. I am not saying that there is no issue, but honestly, I don´t see a big of a problem here...But that´s just me. I guess I am a lucky guy because I didn´t notice anything bad in my R5 but as soon I have some time I will test this. Like said before, I had in the past a camera with severe shutter-shock, it was the Canon 7D mkII. Canon never recognized the problem so i solved the problem...by selling the camera. :) If you are experiencing those issues you should adress Canon and see what they tell about it.
This is not an explanation, it's an assumption. Sorry for my hot words.
I'm not a newbie. From personal purchase of Olympus film, Sony, to Canon 20D, 5DI,5DII,5DIII,5DIV,R5, all new sets, no used or rentals, I have some confidence in my experience on holding a camera firmly.
The shutter shock is not only happened 3 photos I posted here, it's a "phenomenon" from mass.
I have not reported to Canon, maybe later.
I do think they get to know this issue already. Who knows whether some of them already replied in this post?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Yes,as stated. But I believe you are seeing something. It just helps me to run a controlled series to nail down variables. I will still use EFCS for portraits, mechanical for high shutter speeds.
I tested by hand hold.
Since I take most with my hands and less on tripod.
I'd also noticed, it's (shutter shock) a little bit better with my Sigma 85/1.4Art which is a heavier lens than EF24-70/2.8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
7-1-100-IBIS OFF.jpg
I tested with IBIS: OFF. Other condition having no change.
All the 3-photo are in continuous sequence, not selected.

3 photos with mechanical shutter are all blurred.
2 out of 3 photos with EFCS are sharp.

Can I say this shutter shock is not IBIS related. It is caused by the shutter not the "floating" sensor.
5T5A0097sml.jpg

5T5A0104sml-480x1024.jpg
EOS R5 shutter assembly, photo belong to www.lensrentals.com.
 

Attachments

  • 7-1-100-IBIS OFF.jpg
    7-1-100-IBIS OFF.jpg
    319.4 KB · Views: 57
Upvote 0

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,801
2,247
Hamburg, Germany
R5 shutter curtains are driven by two motors.
Most previous Canon camera shutter are driven by one motor.
Is this the root cause?
I don't think so, at least not directly. Maybe the shutter is driven with more torque now. Or the lesser mass means the same torque accelerates the whole system differently.

But if you go looking for it, I bet you could find the same kind of blur when shooting in LiveView with the 5Ds. This shutter shock is less of a factor in a DSLR since you would often just use the OVF, where the shutter is already closed. In LiveView, it is open, so before a picture can be taken, it first has to close, which seems to introduce a shake in the system. Which is why the effect can be eliminated by using the first curtain electronic shutter.

I think the question about this being an issue or not is not worth answering - a user has to decide that for themselves based in their individual use case. I both see it as exaggerated to call the body useless though. I can't imagine this is producing less detailed results than a 5D IV with its lower resolution and lack of IBIS.

Nonetheless, I also think Canon should just implement a setting for it. After all, if they would not consider shutter shock induced blur an issue at all - why is there an EFCS setting in the first place? And why is it apparently their preferred choice on the RP?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
I don't think so, at least not directly. Maybe the shutter is driven with more torque now. Or the lesser mass means the same torque accelerates the whole system differently.

But if you go looking for it, I bet you could find the same kind of blur when shooting in LiveView with the 5Ds. This shutter shock is less of a factor in a DSLR since you would often just use the OVF, where the shutter is already closed. In LiveView, it is open, so before a picture can be taken, it first has to close, which seems to introduce a shake in the system. Which is why the effect can be eliminated by using the first curtain electronic shutter.

I think the question about this being an issue or not is not worth answering - a user has to decide that for themselves based in their individual use case. I both see it as exaggerated to call the body useless though. I can't imagine this is producing less detailed results than a 5D IV with its lower resolution and lack of IBIS.

Nonetheless, I also think Canon should just implement a setting for it. After all, if they would not consider shutter shock induced blur an issue at all - why is there an EFCS setting in the first place? And why is it apparently their preferred choice on the RP?
Totally agree. For my use case the shutter shock blur isn’t going to make a photo unusable. But after spending so much money buying into the RF system and RF L lenses it just feels like an obligation to make the very most of the equipment. It just feels better spending time working on an image that is devoid of technical flaws no matter how minor.

And yes, Canon should implement auto switching between EFCS and mechanical like other manufacturers do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
I tested with IBIS: OFF. Other condition having no change.
All the 3-photo are in continuous sequence, not selected.

3 photos with mechanical shutter are all blurred.
2 out of 3 photos with EFCS are sharp.

Can I say this shutter shock is not IBIS related. It is caused by the shutter not the "floating" sensor.


EOS R5 shutter assembly, photo belong to www.lensrentals.com.

I think the point that privatebydesign was making earlier is that we have to have convincing evidence of the problem if we, consumers, are going to prod them to make firmware changes. I'm glad he challenged me, because while this problem is real, as Joules suggests, and as Chris.Chapterten has been saying for many weeks, it can be elusive to demonstrate. I did my best last night!

Discussing the issue on various forums helps define and confirm, but I'd really ask you and all owners who see this as an inconvenient problem with a very expensive camera to contact Canon and share images taken under controlled conditions. I just don't think using a random subject or target handheld is convincing enough for them.

If it is connected to the shutter mechanism or the IBIS cradle allowing a little more vibration than we'd see in a camera without IBIS at these speeds, then maybe Chris.Chapterten is right, and the very best fix is a menu option to have shutter modes switch as appropriate. Same fix would work if this is a charateristic of mirrorless cameras as manufactured today.

I'm not the only one here who hears your frustration! But proving this to each other won't solve the problem. Please use clear and controlled tests, then contact Canon by phone and email.

And in the meantime, if you are going to keep the camera, enjoy it! Otherwise, relieve yourself of the burden and buy again when the issue has been addressed.

Happy Holidays!
 
Upvote 0
I think the point that privatebydesign was making earlier is that we have to have convincing evidence of the problem if we, consumers, are going to prod them to make firmware changes. I'm glad he challenged me, because while this problem is real, as Joules suggests, and as Chris.Chapterten has been saying for many weeks, it can be elusive to demonstrate. I did my best last night!

Discussing the issue on various forums helps define and confirm, but I'd really ask you and all owners who see this as an inconvenient problem with a very expensive camera to contact Canon and share images taken under controlled conditions. I just don't think using a random subject or target handheld is convincing enough for them.

If it is connected to the shutter mechanism or the IBIS cradle allowing a little more vibration than we'd see in a camera without IBIS at these speeds, then maybe Chris.Chapterten is right, and the very best fix is a menu option to have shutter modes switch as appropriate. Same fix would work if this is a charateristic of mirrorless cameras as manufactured today.

I'm not the only one here who hears your frustration! But proving this to each other won't solve the problem. Please use clear and controlled tests, then contact Canon by phone and email.

And in the meantime, if you are going to keep the camera, enjoy it! Otherwise, relieve yourself of the burden and buy again when the issue has been addressed.

Happy Holidays!
Thanks.
It's a "seriously" flawed product which camera can not achieve well what it claimed meanwhile users cannot take sharp images at 1/100 shutter speed (range expands to 1/60-1/200 at least) with mechanical shutter though manufacturer may have a lot of words to cast to we users.
This is not the overheating or freezing issues which happen occasionally or cases less.
Canon should recall the camera unless someone can show me he can hand-carry take sharp image @ 1/100 with mechanical shutter, IBIS ON or OFF.
 
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
Thanks.
It's a "seriously" flawed product which camera can not achieve well what it claimed meanwhile users cannot take sharp images at 1/100 shutter speed (range expands to 1/60-1/200 at least) with mechanical shutter though manufacturer may have a lot of words to cast to we users.
This is not the overheating or freezing issues which happen occasionally or cases less.
Canon should recall the camera unless someone can show me he can hand-carry take sharp image @ 1/100 with mechanical shutter, IBIS ON or OFF.
Did you look carefully at my test shots?

Please contact Canon. I have, and I would like to know what they are saying to others.

Would the firmware fix satisfy you? If not, why? I am getting great results with EFCS at these problematic speeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,801
2,247
Hamburg, Germany
Canon should recall the camera unless someone can show me he can hand-carry take sharp image @ 1/100 with mechanical shutter, IBIS ON or OFF.
Would you also like them to recall all DSLR because you have to use mirror lock up to ensure sharp images under certain circumstances?

How does having to switch to EFCS warrant a recall? And how would you expect it to be adressed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Would you also like them to recall all DSLR because you have to use mirror lock up to ensure sharp images under certain circumstances?

How does having to switch to EFCS warrant a recall? And how would you expect it to be adressed?
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.
 
Upvote 0
Did you look carefully at my test shots?

Please contact Canon. I have, and I would like to know what they are saying to others.

Would the firmware fix satisfy you? If not, why? I am getting great results with EFCS at these problematic speeds.
Will try.
I'm not a professional photographer, just a hobbyist. Never have any experience like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

docsmith

CR Pro
Sep 17, 2010
1,223
1,109
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!
Exactly.

I have heard people talk about wobbles in electronic shutter mode, bokeh "issues" with ECFS, and now "shutter shock" with mechanical. During lockdown, I am mostly doing backyard birding. I have used all three modes. All have taken excellent pictures. Pictures that I can visibly see the improved resolution over my 5DIV. The AF has proven to be second to only the 1DXIII that I tested. I haven't run into a buffer issue. The FPS have allowed for capturing action that previously I did not.

The R5 is a great camera. It will not be faultless, but it will take amazing pictures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Exactly.

I have heard people talk about wobbles in electronic shutter mode, bokeh "issues" with ECFS, and now "shutter shock" with mechanical. During lockdown, I am mostly doing backyard birding. I have used all three modes. All have taken excellent pictures. Pictures that I can visibly see the improved resolution over my 5DIV. The AF has proven to be second to only the 1DXIII that I tested. I haven't run into a buffer issue. The FPS have allowed for capturing action that previously I did not.

The R5 is a great camera. It will not be faultless, but it will take amazing pictures.
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.:unsure:
 
Upvote 0