JimH Loc: Western South Jersey, USA

With Canon, who have IN-LENS I/S, it depends on the lens - with the newer version, you can leave the I/S on. Read your manual to find out for sure.

With camera body I/S, I suppose that last statement might still be appropriate. Read your manual for sure.

Jwilliams0469 Loc: Topeka, Ks.

I have to agree and just to say, I honestly thought the top photograph was sharper and you have said it was the one without mirror lockup enabled. I don't see a huge difference in the quality and to use it everyday for everything is just not on my list of things to be sure of.

I've never used it and probably never will. I do macro stacking of photographs and they turn out great! I think I can see where it would benefit from the use of the mirror lockup enabled, but will I use it? Most likely not. :D

pyoung3000

I shoot without IS at all. I'm trying to train my muscles to hold the camera steadier.

JaniceA

Lots of discussion going on here. From a technically standpoint -- Yes, anything that produces camera shake is going to make a less sharp image. The amount may not be that noticeable unless it is blown up to a large size. Taking landscape or macro photography would be great times to use it. Subjects that basically stay still (the waterfall or lake can move - all else remains still) would be the best to photograph this way - FILM or DIGITAL the same applies. Taking pictures of people (Other than possible portrait shots), insects, wildlife - common sense - just take the picture or you might loose the shot. I am guilty of not using mirror lock-up, for most of my shooting is of the 2nd kind. However, I would like to do more of the other and will probably be using the mirror lockup, pre-focusing and remote cable to improve the pics. Choice of using a tree as a subject to shoot even at 1/250 - was it a perfectly still day? I personally thought the first pic seemed a little sharper. That is the only thing I could think of for why the 2nd image wasn't as sharp in my eyes. Now you should know the benefits. Basically, you need to ask yourself - what are you going to do with the pictures? If they are mostly for your enjoyment - do whatever your heart desires.

drjuice

The lower image is with mirror lockup. The trick is to look for a really unique object and see how clearly focused that object is. So, look for that orange leaf (Free clue: you can see it really clearly in the 33% crop). ;~)

josoIII

KG, fantastic hands on post, I guess I'll need to go back on my statement and say, mirror lock up will make your images more crisp and sharper edge detail.

you have made that very clear with this comparison, nice work.

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

I like JaniceA's well thought out answer.

Mirror lockup is not new. It was an integral part of SLR systems from the very beginning of SLR camera's (Yes, I was there). As Janice mentioned, any part of a camera system that adds to stabilizing the camera during the actual shot is just part of the series of tools that good camera's include.

Ultimate image quality is a function of many aspects of the shot, and includes any component of the process that stabilizes the camera. In fact, MLU (Mirror Lock Up) was a much more significant feature of Medium Format camera's, where the mirror's were big and heavy, such as Mamiya, Hasselblad, Bronica and most others. It was a lesser known feature on many 35mm SLR cameras, used primarily on "Professional" level camera's, where the photographer benefitted from, and understood, the distinction between locking up the mirror to avoid the minute vibration from "mirror slap". It does exist, but as we move more to electronic shutters, will disappear as a function of the "shot".

However, other questions remain.

1) if using IS or VR, regardless of "in body" or "in lens" degrades the image quality when turned on while the camera is tripod mounted, it's because the final shutter action is delayed while the IS "hunts" for vibration as it is designed to do, then the understanding of the MLU is the least of your worries. You simply don't understand the mechanism of your camera.

2) if not understanding the "vibration damping" qualities of your tripod, due to the material from which it is made, ie. wood, metal alloy, or carbon fiber, then understanding and using MLU is another "least" of your worries. Efforts to reduce the weight of tripods degrade the benefit of using one. A tripod should be heavy, and that can only be attained by packing around a light tripod, and making it heavier at the photo site, with added weight.

3) If you don't understand the benefit of hanging a 15-20 pound bag of rocks, or a gallon jug of water from the center post of your tripod, then not understanding and using MLU is again, the least of your worries.

4) If you don't truly understand how using your forefinger to "Stab and Jab" at the shutter button degrades the image you just shot, which is avoided by NOT touching the camera (use a remote release), then I once more contend that you can skip the part of your manual about using MLU.

MLU is not some new trick of "digital". All the things I have mentioned above have been around since near the beginning of photography, and well documented (tested time and again) by both manufacturers, engineers, and professional users of photographic equipment.

All the functions that lead to the best possible image are choices of many features of your equipment. The finest pictures come from simple cameras, where there are minimal moving parts, like large format camera mounted on a heavy wooden tripod, with 20 pounds of stabilizing weight hung from the center post. The shutter is a simple leaf shutter, and release is done remotely by a long flexible cable, or an air bulb.

MLU is just one tool which can (without question or doubt) improve the quality of your images, if incorporated with all the other tools to stabilize your camera during any shot.

I have always been entertained by those who for many years have judged cameras as being professional, primarily if they were "Black" and also if the name ended in "ON", as in CaNikon.

gessman Loc: Colorado

They say that the later generations of IS aren't so much affected by being on a tripod but I'm not convinced. When you strap down a squirming object there's almost bound to be some conflict and if it's "dead still" you're after I don't see how you'll achieve it.

You obviously know the proper technique for testing your equipment so I have edited out a lengthy section of this post that involved that.

I have read repeatedly where it is a known fact that the 70-200 2.8 IS is a crap shoot right out of the box - one will be tack sharp and the next soft which is another reason to perform the test with some rigidity, removing all the possible variables that can cause less than tack sharp images - to see if your equipment is what it should be. If not, then you have a beef with Canon and they already know about it and have chosen to not put out a recall hoping nobody will notice. It all just depends on what you're looking for and like it has been said many times and will be said many more- "if you're happy..."

I'll just say this - you spent a wad for equipment to be beyond "everyday" and should be getting what you paid for. I'm actually right there with you - I don't take the time to do all I know I can do to get the best images I could and I have to admit that I've got a lot of shots I can never repeat that I'm pretty damned unhappy about at this point in life.

deb2015 Loc: Washington, Utah

Excellent Post. Another good way to check your images is to blow them up on your computer. The difference can be seen here as well.
I have high end printers and the crispness and clarity is very evident on the test I have done with Mirror lock up.
When testing for Mirror lock impact I would suggest that you also have a good sturdy tripod. I am always amazed to see the money that photographers spend on cameras and lens and then buy cheap tripods and ball heads.

josoIII

very good read, I am going to steal your thoughts here and post them to our camera club... Thank you...

deb2015 Loc: Washington, Utah

The technology today has changed and opened up an entire line of pro cameras other than Nikon or Cannon. We photographers get to sit back and reap the enhancement benefits that come from the competition among the camera companies.

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

[quote=josoIII]

Thank you for the comments, and please feel free to use the post as you like.

I will say this.... one of the best things I ever did in my pursuit of photography happened during the Seventies, when I signed up, did the exercises and completed the NYIP (New York Institute of Photography) home study (mail) course. At that time it was 27 sections with a glossy chapter for each section, and submission of work, with a response on cassette tape from NYIP on each section. The tripod and weight and test section was thorough in detail.

I certainly encourage formal or semi-formal education, and still see NYIP as viable, considering the ease of fitting your schedule to the training, or vice versa.

I feel everyone, myself included, is just a "snapshooter" until you understand very many aspects of the endeavor.

Being a "Professional" is not defined by selling your work. It's defined by the quality of your work and how you pursue your chosen subject matter and how you create images.

There's nothing wrong with shooting snapshots for memories. Professionals just take it to a higher level. Education helps.

So does participation (active) in a camera club. The only thing I deride about camera clubs is the politics.

peacemaker

I would like to thankeach and every one of you for your thoughts and advice. I will try out the morror lock up before and after test and see what Icome up with. You all have been very helpful and again thank you. Maybe some day i can return the favor.

JimH Loc: Western South Jersey, USA

Cash donations cheerfully accepted.. :)

josoIII

saichiez wrote:The only thing I deride about camera clubs is the politics.

You are spot on with this thought.

I was nominated club Pres. this year. unopposed.

Our first meeting is Sept. and the big issue is, edit or no edits.

We have a monthly competition, and some feel they should be almost SOOC, others feel they should be the best you can make them for subject impact.

Both sides have great arguments to support their thoughts.

I am on the fence with this debate because, I do believe there should be a truth with photography.

An image that is for documentation, and is untouched with nothing done to it, can settle some arguments, as to what might have been.

On the other hand I also love to edit photos.