I bought this lens a month ago, and used it to shoot roller derby last night (on an X-T2).
I have never seen this kind of issue with any other gear, ever - and wondered if anyone else has. Basically, as you view the attached images, the second one seems to have been stretched 9for lack of a better term) - as if it was an anamorphic kind of effect. Mind you, these shots were taken, literally, 1 second apart. Of course, the subjects were moving and the angle at which I held the camera changed as I was following their motion.
This is not the only example; just representative of something I have seen perhaps 1% of the time. Is it just the nature of the changed angle at which I held the camera?
Anyone have any idea what is causing it? Or am I just seeing things (okay, clever trolls out there - that last question opens the door for you to rib me all you want)
Ooh - good point - I know the effect - and this was shot at 1/22,000th of a second (i.e. - electronic shutter) so that can be it exactly. Foolish of me not to have realized...first time I've seen it happen.
Very smart - thank you!
f8lee wrote:
I bought this lens a month ago, and used it to shoot roller derby last night (on an X-T2).
I have never seen this kind of issue with any other gear, ever - and wondered if anyone else has. Basically, as you view the attached images, the second one seems to have been stretched 9for lack of a better term) - as if it was an anamorphic kind of effect. Mind you, these shots were taken, literally, 1 second apart. Of course, the subjects were moving and the angle at which I held the camera changed as I was following their motion.
This is not the only example; just representative of something I have seen perhaps 1% of the time. Is it just the nature of the changed angle at which I held the camera?
Anyone have any idea what is causing it? Or am I just seeing things (okay, clever trolls out there - that last question opens the door for you to rib me all you want)
I bought this lens a month ago, and used it to sho... (
show quote)
I don't think it has anything to do with the lens, actually I'm quite sure of it.
speters wrote:
I don't think it has anything to do with the lens, actually I'm quite sure of it.
Well, if you had read what @fedup wrote in his response and my thanks to him, you would have seen it was indeed not - it's the rolling effect from an electronic shutter. There's a lesson in there somewhere...
Ha ha! Same thing happened to. It was a martial arts demo. pretty weird. You may be able use the effect to get a vintage look like some old photo of bicycle races or early Indy car races where the wheels are oval with a diagonal long axis.
Ha ha! Same thing happened to. It was a martial arts demo. pretty weird. You may be able use the effect to get a vintage look like some old photo of bicycle races or early Indy car races where the wheels are oval with a diagonal long axis.
MW wrote:
Ha ha! Same thing happened to. It was a martial arts demo. pretty weird. You may be able use the effect to get a vintage look like some old photo of bicycle races or early Indy car races where the wheels are oval with a diagonal long axis.
Yes, if you can control it. It's essentially the same thing that causes helicopter rotors or airplane propellers to appear curved in some videos. But so far as I can tell it just happens randomly - other shots taken at that shutter speed did not have the effect.
22000/th of a second?
Unless the players have jet packs on ... slow it down ... way down.
Canisdirus wrote:
22000/th of a second?
Unless the players have jet packs on ... slow it down ... way down.
Well, genius, the electronic shutter in the X-T3 can go as fast as 1/35,000th of a second. And "slow down" is not an option on a bright day when using a very wide aperture (like f1.2 in this case)
So, oh clever boy, understand reality.
f8lee wrote:
Well, genius, the electronic shutter in the X-T3 can go as fast as 1/35,000th of a second. And "slow down" is not an option on a f=bright day when using a very wide aperture (like f1.2 in this case)
So, oh clever boy, understand reality.
Time to buy some ND filters? 😉
Canisdirus wrote:
22000/th of a second?
Unless the players have jet packs on ... slow it down ... way down.
I'd think slowing it down would only serve to exaggerate the effect.
terpentijn wrote:
Time to buy some ND filters? 😉
Wow - hard to believe I have to explain this...
wide aperture means shallow depth of field - the effect I was shooting for (pun intended). So while I have plenty of ND filters for other uses, in this case they are of no use.
f8lee wrote:
Wow - hard to believe I have to explain this...
wide aperture means shallow depth of field - the effect I was shooting for (pun intended). So while I have plenty of ND filters for other uses, in this case they are of no use.
Shallow depth of field is one thing, but it seems like 1.2 is overkill for this situation. And I don't see what that has to do with the use of ND filters. It seems to me that using ND filters would be condusive to shooting with a larger aperture.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.