skingfong Loc: Sacramento

I agree with everything you say. On the end of the spectrum there may be some who go extreme with tripod, mirror lock-up, prime lenses lower ISO limit to get the best shot possible. I don't think it's as critical with the technology and equipment we have nowadays.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

It is 2018 but for more than 3 years, I have been using my camera’s electronic shutter. Or the touchscreen. Or control the camera with my iPhone.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

It's not the resonance in the camera body that causes vibration. It's the moving mirror and shutter. If you google shutter shock or vibration you will see a lot of good info, even pertaining to some mirrorless cameras like the Sony A7:

http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/6403-how-to-solve-the-a7r-shutter-shock-problem-without-adding-weight-to-the-camera/

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140116_1-Sony-A7R-shutter-vibration.html

https://www.discoverdigitalphotography.com/2015/what-are-mirror-slap-and-shutter-shock/

Carbon fiber tripods with thick legs and high quality heads are the best way to mitigate this type of vibration, along with solid technique. Don't expect a $200 tripod and head combo to be anywhere as stable as a proper tripod. There are many myths that need to be put to rest - a tripod needs to have 2x the load capacity of your gear, a heavy tripod is better than a light one, there is no difference between aluminum and carbon, and the best one I heard yet - if the tripod can support bowling ball, it should be good enough.

There zooms that are as sharp as primes and vice versa. Broad generalizations ought to be ignored. Old zooms were, as you have observed, often not as sharp as the new stuff.

The overall goal for sharp, clear, high quality images is to use the lowest ISO, fastest shutter speed, and the sharpest aperture. For many lenses the sharpest aperture is often 2- 3 stops from wide open. Some lenses, like long telephoto primes, are often sharpest at maximum aperture. Exceptions to the above goals are often made for creative interpretation - like using a slow shutter speed combined with flawless panning technique to show movement, or using a large aperture to isolate the subject with shallow depth of field, or a tiny aperture to have deep DoF.

For pros, the deciding factor is the client, who will demand a specific level of quality. Typically a pro will be able to justify the best quality gear, including a support system (or any other component) that will not fail at a critical moment. Anyone who desires that high level of quality will either buy the best gear, or do the necessary homework to find suitable substitutes, usually keeping an eye on budget.

And for the naysayers that claim they have never had shutter shock or mirror vibration, please describe the gear, setup, technique, and post a result.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

A lot of study has gone into shake caused by the shutter and mirror. I can be a concern within a certain slow shutter range. If I can find an article or two, I'll post links.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/the-shutter-vibration-issue-explained-by-joseph-holmes/
https://camtest.eu/technology/knowledge/63-impact-of-mirror-and-shutter-induced-camera-shake

I doubt that I would see a difference in sharpness between my primes and zooms. I think you'd have to magnify quite a bit to see significant differences.

I recently did a few headshots with the camera at 12,800 ISO, unbeknownst to me (D750). I didn't realize the slight graininess until I zoomed in to sharpen the focus in LR. Of course, 100 ISO was better, but not that anyone would notice.

Flickwet Loc: NEOhio

Tripod? Sandbags? Time for a mirrorless camera I think. Add VR or the equivalent, hello Olympus. You’re set. With it built into the body my old primes are even stabilized. And...I think modern zooms are where all the modern research and development money go, which narrows the difference in zoom vs prime

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

I'm thankful and embrace the technology available to us today. I will continue to use and upgrade my equipment as significant equipment improvements are made available. I really enjoy photography and the quest of capturing the moment and improving my skills.

Flickwet Loc: NEOhio

And don’t get me wrong I usually use a tripod with the Linhoff tech 4, never with the Rolleiflex.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

I couldn't agree more. Currently, with the equipment that I have, my only concern is noise. Well that and improving my technique.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

I muse over the constant discussions about the sharpest lenses and cameras...pure mental masturbation.

In most cases the best photos and video use settings backing off sharpness and detail. Do you really want to capture every zit, hair follicle and black head in your subject’s face.

Excellent contrast created by good lighting is far more important than the so called sharpest lense to produce a print that pops. Most of the detail discussed cannot be printed anyway with printing press at 300 dpi. In other words a good photographer is far more important than the camera and lens.

Stephan G

Technique, Technique, Technique, Equipment.

That is what was emphasized to me a few decades ago when I started photography. Because of age and physical ailment, I find myself having to re-emphasize this now. My photography skills are slowly climbing back up, but I do have to modify a few things. I no longer am capable of standing "rock solid" as when I was younger. Again, adjustments to all four categories noted above. (This is true for anybody when they go past the last age groups in just about all polls.) We do what we can do, and adjust continually the rest.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

The most significant difference between yesterday and today is technology. We had all mechanical cameras that had to be used with a separate exposure meter. That changed and cameras began to gain a little more technological using electrical parts, automation and in camera exposure meters.
Now we have digital, something that we can see but cannot touch like we used to do with negatives. We have a marvelous technology complemented by extraordinarily good software.
Professional zooms are as sharp as prime lenses. Modern zooms are of excellent quality compared to those of the past. Modern cameras have an excellent performance when it comes to high ISO. I do not like to go beyond ISO 1600 but others could feel differently.
I have no experience with vibrations and a carbon fiber tripod. I have never been in an earthquake photographing. I NEVER had any issues using an aluminum tripod and I still use them today.
You did not mention the word refraction that we know tends to degrade images at small lens openings. I have never had a second thought using a small aperture when I needed one.
Shutter vibration is not an issue like it was in the past because software is handling that. dSLR have damped mirrors to control it. I have no experience with that because when I am serious about what I am doing I lock the mirror in my dSLR bodies.
Great thing I am not a pixel peeper or a purist.

bmike101 Loc: Gainesville, Florida

One thing I have noticed is that auto focus does not get things perfectly sharp. It might be my camera but still.

GAS496 Loc: Arizona

I saw a demonstration similar to Bob’s. I was skeptical at the beginning. The camera was a Nikon 800E with a prime lens and a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod with the image projected on a screen. Vibration was evident no matter how gently the camera was handled/touched, mirror locked up or not. The only thing to dampen the vibration was a bag of gravel placed on top of the camera.

So those that have talked about knowing proper camera technique is more important than owning the latest high end equipment in creating an image get the nod on this one.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

IMHO, it's all about when the various limitations of equipment actually become noticeable. If i can't perceive the difference between an image shot with my kit zoom and my 50mm prime, then it is no longer an issue.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Having and knowing and using the best equipment and technique is the admirable goal.
But after you achieve some technically "perfect" images, then what? Do you attach a note to them certifying that these are technically perfect, pure fine art, the best possible, to what end?

I shot the barn scene as a panorama of 6 photos, each in HDR. The compiled photo flattened was over 100mb. It took hours to do. You can see insects on the plants if you blew it up enough. But all I ever made was a 16x20 print. So what?

(Download)