PDA

View Full Version : What's going on with my camera/lens?


snerkler
2nd February 2015, 09:33 PM
I've just been away for the weekend and experimented just using my EM10 with kit 14-42mm EZ (pancake) lens to see if it's good enough to use. Overall the combo is 'adequate' but some images were disappointing, and looked very blurred in certain areas of the frame but not others. See here, two different frames, both with the same 100 ISO, f5.6, 1/500 settings at 14mm (28mm eq), 100% crops.

This is taken from the top left corner, but not right in the corner
http://i1353.photobucket.com/albums/q673/snerkler/Random%20Forum%20Pics/Screen%20Shot%202015-02-02%20at%2021.06.43_zpsuckblcj0.png
http://i1353.photobucket.com/albums/q673/snerkler/Random%20Forum%20Pics/Screen%20Shot%202015-02-02%20at%2021.06.59_zpsmhx5fnal.png



Note this is another 100% crop from the same frame as the first. OK, far from perfect, but better than the part of the frame in the first pic.
http://i1353.photobucket.com/albums/q673/snerkler/Random%20Forum%20Pics/Screen%20Shot%202015-02-02%20at%2021.16.19_zpsnjgmtmv8.png

Also, look at this example. Note the blurred statue at the bottom compared to the sharper top of the frame (may need to view larger)
http://i1353.photobucket.com/albums/q673/snerkler/Random%20Forum%20Pics/P2013926_zpsvldfcb7r.jpg


So what's going on? If it was shutter shock or camera shake I'd expect it across the frame. Also, I wouldn't expect camera shake at 1/500 with 14mm (28mm eq) focal length.

I've not noticed this before, but I've not really used this lens a lot before.

Zuiko
2nd February 2015, 09:40 PM
Something seriously amiss here. I'm afraid I cannot put my finger on it, but hopefully somebody more technically minded than me will have the answer.

raichea
2nd February 2015, 09:59 PM
For the first shot, possibly a rotational movement, hence more visible in the corners? What's the second image that doesn't show the shake (and has a lot less noise)?
In the last shot, the statue obviously moved.... one of those street artists, right? :) Otherwise, extremely weird!

Zuiko
2nd February 2015, 10:14 PM
For the first shot, possibly a rotational movement, hence more visible in the corners? What's the second image that doesn't show the shake (and has a lot less noise)?
In the last shot, the statue obviously moved.... one of those street artists, right? :) Otherwise, extremely weird!

I think you may have hit upon the problem - a fault with the camera's IBIS?

pdk42
2nd February 2015, 10:31 PM
That's really weird. Whatever it is, a trip to Portugal is probably in order.

Zuiko
2nd February 2015, 10:35 PM
That's really weird. Whatever it is, a trip to Portugal is probably in order.

Or if it's a recent purchase return it to the retailer for replacement with a new one.

raichea
2nd February 2015, 11:38 PM
A fault in the rotational correction of the IBIS could be a cause of the corner blurring, but I can't imagine what could cause the blurring of the statue... it's very odd that there's not the same level of blurring of the building features immediately adjacent to the statue in the image.

wontolla
2nd February 2015, 11:51 PM
Did you use a tripod for the shots?

Ralph Harwood
2nd February 2015, 11:56 PM
Hi there Snerkler!

Could the issue in the last picture be something as simple as a depth of field issue - to me the building seems to gradually loose sharpness as you progress down the image, but the statue would be a considerable amount closer to the camera than even the bottom of the building is - could it push the statue that far out of focus?

As to the first image, again the furthest part of the image from the camera is the most out of focus - so if you have focussed on the nearest part of the building are you just running out of depth of field? You don't say in your post whether the crops are 100% - if so the "normal" rules for depth of field would allow for this amount of blurring as they generally assume a "circle of confusion" of about 3-4 pixels - I always try to re-calculate with a circle of confusion of 1 pixel at most (DOFmaster gives a 0.015mm circle of confusion, but a pixel on a 12Mp 4/3 sensor is 0.0044mm, or 3.4 times smaller.)

DOFmaster gives a hyperfocal distance of 7.62ft at 14mm and f5.6, with between 4ft and infinity "in focus", but if you reduce the circle of confusion to 1 pixel (ie sharp when you pixel peep) you then get a hyperfocal distance of 28ft, and between 14ft and infinity "in focus".

I hope this might help,

Cheers,

Ralph.

PS Sorry for not reading you post correctly - you did state they were 100% crops!

raichea
3rd February 2015, 12:02 AM
Could the issue in the last picture be something as simple as a depth of field issue
Interesting thought.... though the blurring of the statue has a distinct look of camera shake to it (the baton in the statue's hand seems to have two distinct overlaid images). Also, although it's hard to guage distance from the image, the level of blurring of the statue looks greater than I would have expected from DoF issues.

Steve

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 08:13 AM
For the first shot, possibly a rotational movement, hence more visible in the corners? What's the second image that doesn't show the shake (and has a lot less noise)?
In the last shot, the statue obviously moved.... one of those street artists, right? :) Otherwise, extremely weird!

I don't think it's rotational movement tbh as the other corners are sharper, but you never know it could be an IBIS issue.

Lol, definitely no street artist. Possible a ghost? ;)

The reason for the less noise is that the first shot has been sharpened (and still mega blurry) and the 2nd straight out of camera. Forgot to mention that ;)

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 08:14 AM
Hi there Snerkler!

Could the issue in the last picture be something as simple as a depth of field issue - to me the building seems to gradually loose sharpness as you progress down the image, but the statue would be a considerable amount closer to the camera than even the bottom of the building is - could it push the statue that far out of focus?

As to the first image, again the furthest part of the image from the camera is the most out of focus - so if you have focussed on the nearest part of the building are you just running out of depth of field? You don't say in your post whether the crops are 100% - if so the "normal" rules for depth of field would allow for this amount of blurring as they generally assume a "circle of confusion" of about 3-4 pixels - I always try to re-calculate with a circle of confusion of 1 pixel at most (DOFmaster gives a 0.015mm circle of confusion, but a pixel on a 12Mp 4/3 sensor is 0.0044mm, or 3.4 times smaller.)

DOFmaster gives a hyperfocal distance of 7.62ft at 14mm and f5.6, with between 4ft and infinity "in focus", but if you reduce the circle of confusion to 1 pixel (ie sharp when you pixel peep) you then get a hyperfocal distance of 28ft, and between 14ft and infinity "in focus".

I hope this might help,

Cheers,

Ralph.

PS Sorry for not reading you post correctly - you did state they were 100% crops!
Thanks for the reply. I don't think it's DOF issue as the hyperfocal distance was used with aperture of f8, FL 14mm (28mm eq)

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 08:15 AM
Did you use a tripod for the shots?

No, but shutter speed was more than ample. Plus, if it was purely camera shake the whole image would be blurred.

StephenL
3rd February 2015, 08:23 AM
I don't think it can be camera shake due to the shutter speed. But if the sensor was moving when it should be still, then it's a trip to Portugal, I think.

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 08:39 AM
I don't think it can be camera shake due to the shutter speed. But if the sensor was moving when it should be still, then it's a trip to Portugal, I think.

Sorry for the silly question, but what do you mean by a trip to Portugal?

StephenL
3rd February 2015, 08:42 AM
Sorry for the silly question, but what do you mean by a trip to Portugal?
Sorry, Portugal is where Olympus has its European repair facility. But you don't send it there directly - Oly UK will arrange for the camera to be collected from you and handle its repair. All you need to do is ring them and explain the problem. They're very good.

00800 6710 8400 (General Enquiries)
00800 6710 8300 (Technical Enquiries)

shotokan101
3rd February 2015, 08:46 AM
I'm guessing it means send it back for repair ? - though I don't get the Portugal LOL :)

StephenL
3rd February 2015, 09:17 AM
I'm guessing it means send it back for repair ? - though I don't get the Portugal LOL :)
Did you not read my reply? :-)

Pistnbroke
3rd February 2015, 09:22 AM
Is the lens aperture stuck at wide open? reduced quality and DOF

DavyG
3rd February 2015, 09:46 AM
Was IBIS switched on when you took the photos?

Dave

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 09:46 AM
Sorry, Portugal is where Olympus has its European repair facility. But you don't send it there directly - Oly UK will arrange for the camera to be collected from you and handle its repair. All you need to do is ring them and explain the problem. They're very good.

00800 6710 8400 (General Enquiries)
00800 6710 8300 (Technical Enquiries)

Thanks. Have emailed them this morning, will see what they say and update on here.

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 09:47 AM
Is the lens aperture stuck at wide open? reduced quality and DOF

No, aperture's working fine.

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 09:47 AM
Was IBIS switched on when you took the photos?

Dave

Yes, IBIS is on but only on shutter release, ie not active with half press.

Zuiko
3rd February 2015, 10:09 AM
Yes, IBIS is on but only on shutter release, ie not active with half press.

Might be worth enabling IBIS on half press, to see if any strange behavior can be observed in live view.

Miketoll
3rd February 2015, 10:38 AM
Try taking two shots, one with IBIS on then again with IBIS completely off. That should show whether IBIS is the problem or not. Also might be a lens problem like a decentered element? Try with a different lens if you have one to see if that makes any difference.

shotokan101
3rd February 2015, 11:09 AM
Did you not read my reply? :-)

Wasn't there (or I didn't see it when I was typing my reply) - both look to be posted around the same time :)

I did do a quick google first as I susp[ected something like that but didn't spot the Portugal Repair Facility...

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 11:41 AM
Try taking two shots, one with IBIS on then again with IBIS completely off. That should show whether IBIS is the problem or not. Also might be a lens problem like a decentered element? Try with a different lens if you have one to see if that makes any difference.

Yeah that's what I thought of doing too, going to try with IBIS on half press, release only and off. Also, I can't say I've noticed this with any other lens so does bring into question whether it's an IBIS issue, although of course it could have just developed.

If the lens had an issue such as the one you suggest wouldn't it affect all pictures not just the odd ones?

One other thing, it was extremely cold that day and wondering if the cold might affect the IBIS in some way. Bit of a long shot though that thought ;)

Hopefully Olympus can provide some answers.

DavyG
3rd February 2015, 11:56 AM
Yeah that's what I thought of doing too, going to try with IBIS on half press, release only and off. Also, I can't say I've noticed this with any other lens so does bring into question whether it's an IBIS issue, although of course it could have just developed.

If the lens had an issue such as the one you suggest wouldn't it affect all pictures not just the odd ones?

One other thing, it was extremely cold that day and wondering if the cold might affect the IBIS in some way. Bit of a long shot though that thought ;)

Hopefully Olympus can provide some answers.

Just a thought, if it was extremely cold when you took the photo, is it possible you were shivering more than you realised and this may have reduced the effectiveness of the IBIS?

It may be worth trying some test shots using the same kit in ambient conditions with IBIS on and then tripod mount and try with IBIS off and comparing the results.

Dave

shotokan101
3rd February 2015, 12:02 PM
going to be hard to track down if it's not readily repeatable...

Pistnbroke
3rd February 2015, 12:05 PM
If you put the camera to your ear you can hear the stabilization system humming ...if its working...

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 01:23 PM
If you put the camera to your ear you can hear the stabilization system humming ...if its working...

Yeah, but only if I set it to half press IBIS obviously :)

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 01:24 PM
going to be hard to track down if it's not readily repeatable...

Agreed :( :confused:

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 01:26 PM
Just a thought, if it was extremely cold when you took the photo, is it possible you were shivering more than you realised and this may have reduced the effectiveness of the IBIS?

It may be worth trying some test shots using the same kit in ambient conditions with IBIS on and then tripod mount and try with IBIS off and comparing the results.

Dave

Lol, with all the best will in the world I think you'd need to be shivering a lot to see shake at 1/500 ;) But no I wasn't shivering ;)

Yeah, definitely going to be running some test shots, although I won't be doing it on a tripod as it's always best to turn the IBIS off for tripod shots anyway. Plus, I want to be able to repeat the issue, and I was hand holding at the time :)

Pistnbroke
3rd February 2015, 01:27 PM
Mine makes a buzz all the time and get louder in half press ...

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 01:28 PM
Mine makes a buzz all the time and get louder in half press ...

That doesn't sound right, why should it buzz when it's not active?

snerkler
3rd February 2015, 01:49 PM
Test shots this lunchtime revealed no abnormalities, taken with IBIS on auto/full, half press on/off and IBIS off.

I will keep trying shots to see if it will do it again. Another long stretch but I'm wondering if there could have been a software glitch that's reset itself since the camera's been turned off and on again?

byegad
3rd February 2015, 03:04 PM
Maybe it was a warp in the space/time continuum?

Ralph Harwood
3rd February 2015, 06:40 PM
Hi there Snerkler!

My thoughts on the hyperfocal distance were just because the standard dof tools don't cater for pixel peeping. I hope you find out the cause though, I'm sure other people on here would be interested to find out what was causing it.

Cheers,

Ralph.

wontolla
3rd February 2015, 07:11 PM
No, but shutter speed was more than ample. Plus, if it was purely camera shake the whole image would be blurred.

I was asking because I had a similar problem to this and it was because I forgot to turn the IS of when on a tripod.

snerkler
4th February 2015, 01:00 PM
Quick update, Olympus have asked that I send the camera in to them.

Miketoll
4th February 2015, 04:47 PM
It will be interesting to hear what they say.

snerkler
5th February 2015, 04:51 PM
Olympus have emailed back after seeing the image an confirmed something is not right. Their initial thoughts are that it's a lens element issue, but they will obviously confirm when they get the camera in. Wouldn't a lens element issue show up on all images though?

shotokan101
5th February 2015, 04:53 PM
You would thinks so wouldn't you ?

will be interesting to hear what they actually find

Zuiko
5th February 2015, 04:54 PM
Olympus have emailed back after seeing the image an confirmed something is not right. Their initial thoughts are that it's a lens element issue, but they will obviously confirm when they get the camera in. Wouldn't a lens element issue show up on all images though?

Maybe not if it's a lose element, sometimes shifting out of position and sometimes not.

snerkler
5th February 2015, 04:57 PM
Maybe not if it's a lose element, sometimes shifting out of position and sometimes not.

Interesting. I'm not clued up enough on these things really it's all just based on my logic, which some would argue is none existent ;)

Miketoll
5th February 2015, 05:41 PM
The apparent effect of the de-centred element would vary depending on the focal length and the aperture used.

snerkler
5th February 2015, 05:45 PM
The apparent effect of the de-centred element would vary depending on the focal length and the aperture used.

But with one example I took almost the same shot with the same settings and focal length seconds later and that didn't display the symptoms :confused:

Miketoll
5th February 2015, 06:52 PM
I don't understand either then. :confused:

Ralph Harwood
5th February 2015, 07:39 PM
Hi there Snerkler/ John!

Wasn't there a post a little while ago abour floating rear elements on some olympus lenses? I seem to think that a 12mmf2.0 was involved, where the rear element was effectively sprung loaded against the back of the lens. If the rear element was angled that could effect sharpness across the frame in the same way as a lensbaby composer works. I'll dig a little deeper later when I'm on my computer and see if I can find the post.

Zuiko
5th February 2015, 09:32 PM
Interesting. I'm not clued up enough on these things really it's all just based on my logic, which some would argue is none existent ;)

I'm purely speculating too. It will be interesting to hear what Olympus say when they have the camera.

Ralph Harwood
5th February 2015, 11:10 PM
Hi again Snerkler / John!

I knew that there had been a post about movable rear elements - it was here :-

http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=29834

and it was my suggestion at the time that the lens could possibly have become uncentred.

Cheers,

Ralph.

snerkler
19th February 2015, 02:12 PM
So my Olly's just got back, 8 days since I sent it so I'm happy with that. I'm a bit baffled about the work undertaken though. Here's the list:-

EM10
Fault>TFT/OLED>replaced.
Fault>software>adjusted.

14-42mm EZ
Fault>transport system>motors>replaced.
Fault>electronic>AF motor>replaced.

Seems like it's had an overhaul. Can't fault the service, fixed things I didn't even know were faulty ;) Whoever buys it from me should have one of the best used EM10's out there :) (I've just ordered the EM5-II so the EM10 will be going)

wontolla
19th February 2015, 04:51 PM
Glad you got it sorted bud!
Had a good experience myself with Olympus repair service, camera came back with new shutter, serviced and spotless. Good customer care in my book!

snerkler
19th February 2015, 04:56 PM
Glad you got it sorted bud!
Had a good experience myself with Olympus repair service, camera came back with new shutter, serviced and spotless. Good customer care in my book!

Yeah, top notch service. I always keep my gear as pristine as possible, but it's come back looking even more pristine :D

Miketoll
19th February 2015, 04:59 PM
14-42mm EZ
Fault>transport system>motors>replaced.
Fault>electronic>AF motor>replaced.

Glad things have been sorted, I guess that the lens transport/motor faults would explain the weird inconsistant problems you were getting.

snerkler
19th February 2015, 05:04 PM
Glad things have been sorted, I guess that the lens transport/motor faults would explain the weird inconsistant problems you were getting.

Thanks. TBH I've no idea what the transport thing is :o

Miketoll
19th February 2015, 05:41 PM
Think it's the bits that move the elements around for focussing and on a power zoom for zooming too. No doubt somebody will correct me if I am wrong!

snerkler
19th February 2015, 06:33 PM
Think it's the bits that move the elements around for focussing and on a power zoom for zooming too. No doubt somebody will correct me if I am wrong!

That could explain it then :)

snerkler
19th February 2015, 07:16 PM
OK, so I've finally got home and tried out my newly returned EM10 and it's like a different camera. I don't know if they have serviced it too, but the control dials are so much nicer to use, especially the front. It's smoother to operate but without being loose in the slightest. It's still nice and precise but seems to glide. Also, the viewfinder is much clearer. On another forum I commented how the viewfinder wasn't as crisp as my Sony A77 I had at the time. Now it seems much clearer and just about as good as the A77 if I recall. Seems odd as I didn't notice any difference with my EM10 and the one I first demo'd at the store. So either both were dodgy, or they've secretly improved the EVF since launch :confused:

Ralph Harwood
19th February 2015, 10:16 PM
EM10
Fault>TFT/OLED>replaced.
Fault>software>adjusted.



It could be that it was the EVF TFT panel that was replaced rather than the back one - that might explain the improvement of the viewfinder.

Cheers,

Ralph.

snerkler
19th February 2015, 10:21 PM
It could be that it was the EVF TFT panel that was replaced rather than the back one - that might explain the improvement of the viewfinder.

Cheers,

Ralph.
Yeah, sorry I got that bit but I didn't realise it was faulty and I'd not noticed any difference to the EM10 I'd tried in store. So either mine and the store's had the same issue, or they made some tweaks to it after the initial batch. I guess I could also have been mistaken about the one in store but I'm pretty keen on spotting these things tbh. Either way, I'm not complaining :)

snerkler
21st February 2015, 05:36 PM
Hmmm, I've had a proper play with my camera today and I've noticed that my camera has been damaged whilst it's been away at Olympus. There's 3 marks/dents on the pentaprism area. I have sent an email to Olympus and await there response. I'm sure they will handle it brilliantly as I've been very impressed with their customer service already. Not great though being as I'm planning on selling it

Miketoll
21st February 2015, 09:42 PM
Putting your last two posts together maybe there was nothing wrong with the EVF until they dented the pentaprism area (dropped the camera?) so they had to put a new EVF in to correct the damage they did? Just a thought! I have a suspicious mind! *devil

snerkler
21st February 2015, 10:55 PM
Putting your last two posts together maybe there was nothing wrong with the EVF until they dented the pentaprism area (dropped the camera?) so they had to put a new EVF in to correct the damage they did? Just a thought! I have a suspicious mind! *devil

Hmm, possibly. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt though as I've generally been more than happy with them to date. I expect them to deal with this in the same way. Bit annoying I'll have to pay postage again though to send it back, cost me a lot last time to make sure it was insured.

snerkler
24th February 2015, 09:55 AM
Quick update. Olympus have replied apologising and saying that they will pick the camera up at their expense and rectify the problem. Good customer service again imo :)

Miketoll
24th February 2015, 12:18 PM
Here's hoping, do let us know the outcome.

snerkler
5th March 2015, 08:13 PM
So my EM10's back and I'm happy to report that everything seems to be fine with it. They replaced the part they damaged and it's back to being pristine again :)

OK, so they shouldn't have damaged the camera but I am happy with the way it's been dealt with.

Miketoll
5th March 2015, 10:13 PM
Good news, alls well that ends well.