IS on and off

I too see the subtle exposure differences. I'm willing to do the Canon IS version of the same test.

For consistency though, I suggest shooting 5 to 10 frames of each for comparison. I'll use a 70-200mm IS lens for the Canon test. It would also be interesting to see if the anomaly follows at differeing focal lengths. I won't be able to do it until this weekend though. The jellybeans look like an excellent test subject, so I'll use the same here. We need a Nikonian and an Olympus shooter in this too! If this isn't a photo-geek thread, I don't know what is!

if i can get some time, i might try with my nikon 70-200 (its my only vr) but i might not be able to make anything with enough consistent lighting for it to work.

Quote:

---

If this isn't a photo-geek thread, I don't know what is! -Canon Bob

---

I'm digging it. :-)
if this isn't some of the best grassroots photography reviewing I don't know what is.

I think Scott's experiment is awesome. I look forward to other inputs.
I will be in the woods shooting all day tomorrow. I'll bring the tripod and try to setup something, probably more along the line of Ron's outdoor test.

PR (((ROCKS)))

Scott, did you shoot these test shots in RAW or JPEG? The reason I ask is because if shooting JPEG, the camera is processing the images. I wonder if it's possible that the camera could process the images differently between shots? Just a thought.

Differences in exposure are even more dramatic between lenses (depending upon coating), and at different focal lengths (because of total scene light diffusion). That's why we often notice differences in how different lenses handle color saturation. I've even noticed slight differences between copies of the same lens models.
"Color satutration" probably isn't the correct term for this, because I believe it actually stays the same, according to the cameras processor, but what is changing is the tone of the shots, and even the slightest darkening of a scene will give it the apearance of more saturation. What's actually happening here, I believe, is minor light variances within the camera's f-stop perameters, which on my K20D I presume are graduated in 1/3 stops.
I do believe, also, that digital sensors are more sensitive to minor light variances than film was. I played around with Kodachrome for many years and often underexposed it from 1/4 to a full stop, and did a lot of bracketing, to get the maximum Kodack "magic." I find when I bracket shots on my K20D at 1/3-stop, I get almost as much variance in tone and color saturation as when I bracketed Kodachrome by 3/4 or a full stop.
Anyway, I expect you'll get a lot of different exposure/shutter readings with the 70-200s mentioned at different focal lengths, so you might want to make note of those readings as well, and if you have a focal lock, be sure to lock it down for each series of shots at each focal length.
For you "controll" freaks, you're talking about less control than with fixed focal lengths, but I like the idea, because it will expand the experiment greatly (although it might get a little confusing keeping track of everything). Thankfully, computers give us all those paramaters without taking extensive notes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjs1973

Scott, did you shoot these test shots in RAW or JPEG? The reason I ask is because if shooting JPEG, the camera is processing the images. I wonder if it's possible that the camera could process the images differently between shots? Just a thought.

---

Mike, these were shot in Raw then simply resized in photoshop and saved as Jpegs.

The difference to my eye seems to be as Ron states a difference in light which is affecting the saturation. It is so slight as to be negligable for my level of photography but for someone shooting for publication it is interesting and worth being aware of although I'm certain it could be corrected for in post processing or with an ev correction while shooting. I'd be interested in seeing comparison tests with other brands simply out of curiosity.

Great eye to see this Ron and thanks for bringing it up. My level of expertise as a photographer isn't very high but that won't stop me from remembering this and shutting off the SR when I use a tripod. I'll take any advantage I can get...
:)

I was at my local state park today hunting anything that would jump in front of my lens when I remembered to make a few tests of VR on and off using the tripod and RF shutter release.

VR ON
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/User/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.smallfont {mso-style-name:smallfont;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> http://gallery.photographyreview.com.../500/VR_on.JPG<o>:p></o>:p>
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o>:p></o>:p>
EXIF Information File name: VR_on.JPG
File size: 581462 bytes
File date: 2009:02:20 15:02:44
Camera make: NIKON CORPORATION
Camera model: NIKON D80
Date/Time: 2009:02:20 12:43:27
Resolution: 1024 x 685
Flash used: No
Focal length: 70.0mm (35mm equivalent: 105mm)
Exposure time: 0.0020 s (1/500)
Aperture: f/22.0
ISO equiv.: 800
Exposure bias: -1
Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)<o></o>

VR OFF
http://gallery.photographyreview.com...500/VR_off.JPG<o>:p></o>:p>
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o>:p></o>:p>
EXIF Information File name: VR_off.JPG
File size: 572009 bytes
File date: 2009:02:20 15:02:48
Camera make: NIKON CORPORATION
Camera model: NIKON D80
Date/Time: 2009:02:20 12:43:34
Resolution: 1024 x 685
Flash used: No
Focal length: 70.0mm (35mm equivalent: 105mm)
Exposure time: 0.0020 s (1/500) Aperture: f/22.0
ISO equiv.: 800
Exposure bias: -1
Whitebalance: Auto
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)

I did several tests moving from spot to spot with the same results. Shot 1 was always more saturated(darker) than shot 2. I even stitched up and took shots with VR off first. Maybe the cameras sensor is storing a little light from the first shot.

That is interesting Bob, it shows that this isn't just Pentax Dslrs that have this variance. It would be interesting to hear a manufacturer's explanation of the cause.