stevenh0027 wrote:
Hi all,
I tried to take some photos of some buildings at night. I used a Canon 60d on a tripod. I set the mirror up and set the shutter release on a 2 min delay. I had the iso at 100 (to minimize noise). The lens is EF-S 18-135mm. Stabilisation was on.
Looking at the results there still seems to be camera movement (see attached).
To get it looking really sharp do you have to manipulate the image on the computer?
By the way the white wiry lines around the spires are birds hunting insects attracted by the light.
Hi all, br I tried to take some photos of some bui... (
show quote)
First a question - what tripod and head are you using?
This is what I see.
The only things that are showing evidence of movement are the highlights - basically your lights and brightly lit areas.
At F8 you have a hyperfocal distance of 65.5 ft, which means that you will be in "acceptable" focus from 33 ft to infinity. Your focus point was dead center in the image, which may have been somewhere near 65 ft away. It is shown by the red box in the attached image. I suggest you use the hyperfocal recommendations with a grain of salt. They make assumptions about what is acceptable sharpness is. Regardless, I don't think you have a depth of field issue. I can read the license plate on the white
www.ridleyagriproducts.com.au car on the left, and the stars in the sky are points, and do not show movement. Looks like good DoF to my eyes, though I might have used F11 in this setting and focused on the stop sign, just to give me a little more DoF.
The bright areas are bright enough to begin to register on the sensor almost immediately, the other areas may take a few seconds. You used a 32 second exposure. I will take a guess that your movement started at the beginning of the exposure, and the darker areas (most of the image) were not sufficiently exposed in the first few seconds to show any movement, but once the camera settled down everything else recorded without movement.
I am going out on a limb, but I am pretty sure you're vibration is the result of either using an inadequate tripod or leaving the stabilization on.
Just because a tripod is sturdy enough to support, it doesn't necessarily mean that it will be rigid enough to stabilize. This is why tripod load ratings are worthless. If this scenario is at play, you are likely seeing the effects of shutter shock, which cannot be mechanically stabilized, and is a "feature" of all cameras with a moving shutter curtain. When you dissect what happens when you press the shutter, the very last thing that moves is the first curtain of the shutter, and it takes a very rigid tripod to adequately dampen this kind of movement, which happens pretty quickly with good gear. A two second delay, mirror lock up, remote shutter release,etc will not make up for a less than rigid tripod and head.
It is also possible that by leaving stabilization on you may have also introduced vibration. It senses camera movement and moves some "floating" lens elements to counteract this movement. It is responsive to coarse, low frequency/high amplitude movements, like when you are hand-holding. It is ineffectual at shutter speeds shorter than 1/500 (it can't sample movement and respond in that time interval) and will work fine to the longest shutter you can hand hold - I've held an 18mm lens stable to 1 sec, and a 600mm to 1/25 - but the keeper rate is pretty low. When you are on a tripod, there is no camera movement of the type it is designed to respond to, so it gets "confused" and tries to move on it's own. Also, stabilization needs to be stabilized. Sounds counter-intuitive, but stabilization is not instantaneous. When hand-holding you will get much more consistent results if you allow the stabilization system to settle down for a half-second or more by half-pressing the shutter before actually taking the shot.
What lens stabilization will not do is stabilize shutter shock - which is a low amplitude/high frequency vibration, which is why you need to turn it off when using a tripod. It is simply not sensitive enough to sense the movement or respond quickly enough to be of any value.
You can test both theories easily enough - try turning off stabilization first and take a shot with the 2 sec delay on. Then turn off the delay, place your left hand on the camera, and take a few shots, pressing the shutter button ever so gently. The left hand may be enough to dampen the shutter shock if it is indeed a contributing factor.
Then borrow a very sturdy tripod from someone. I mean really sturdy - like something you might use with a 600mm lens to keep it stable. Try the same drill above and review your results.
I am pretty sure it is the tripod, but it could be the stabilization being on. Anyway, post your results.