Conclusion: most people may not notice the rolling shutter in the background in a portrait-mode horizontal pan SOOC, but there is always rolling shutter if the shutter rolls and the lens moves
If your subject went left to right and you panned it, and then it went right to left, and you panned it again, showing those images in sequence would reveal their difference in horizontal compression.
thats the thing, it didnt at all, i even overlaid my ev bike wheels they are 27inch. there was more lens distortion at the edges of the frame but no distortion in the center. its like i said to another poster . shooting anamorphic with the a93 the boarders of the image are distorted just like rolling shutter.
[deleted]
Wrong conclusion. You're simply not performing the tests in a way that will clearly show the evidence. Physics dictates that rolling shutter will either compress or expand the image when panning across a stationary subject, depending on the test parameters.
That too.
Expect some form of compression or expansion, though you might not always see it depending on the parameters and the direction of subject movement. Flip the camera over in the other vertical orientation and the effects will change again.
you shot in landscape turn your camera 90 deg and shoot like a phone.
[deleted]
i havnt got a centrifuge to spin the camera on 😉 and normally dont need one when shooting sports. can you buy them with a rss plate 🙄
Fortunately, a centrifuge isn't needed to conduct a test that can show the compression/expansion.
buy a sony 😁 how slow is the sensor readout ?
fast pan and stationary shot.
Yes, that example shows a bit of compression/expansion.
Here's an example that shows more. The V3 electronic shutter has a readout speed of about 1/80s. I guess 1/8000s was unnecessarily fast, but I was panning pretty fast and wanted to avoid blur. I stopped after catching these two almost perfectly framed shots.
Thank you!
4.5% horisontal compression - this is good result and almost unnoticeable.
my a6300 has a nearly 2x faster sensor read out speed. which is probably the difference is a lot less. to be honest i couldnt tell which one of your images was the correct image or not. so why have we even captured an image at 1/8000 sec when the sensor is 1/80 ?
Neither is 'correct'. One is panning left and the other is panning right.
As I said, I chose it to be sure to avoid blur so I could pan faster and show a greater difference. I could have chosen a slower shutter speed and a slower panning speed without incurring much blur and without incurring as much compression/expansion.
You understand that the 'shutter speed' is simply how long each pixel is turned on to receive light, right? And the 1/80s part is how long the progression of pixels turning on takes to move across the frame from edge to edge? The panning speed and the sensor speed act together to determine the extent of the compression/expansion. We just need a shutter speed that gives a decent looking result without blur from whatever panning speed was used.
thanks, brain freeze, but i looked up the specs of your camera and its 1/13 sec sensor speed.
The R is 80ms. 1 / 0.080 = 1.25 or 1/12.
his eos r is 1/13 sec not 1/80
The R is 80ms. 1 / 0.080 = 1.25 or 1/12.
Where did you find that specification? These tests show readout speeds of about 1/80s for the Nikon V3, as I said:
nikon1user.blogspot.com/2014/10/electronic-shutter-readout-speed.html
I also did my own testing in the past and came up with the same estimate.
I think you mean its about 13 milliseconds, or 0.013 second, which is about 1/80s.
Oh - and I can give you another reason why the 'specification' you're stating is completely wrong. The V3 can fully sync using normal (not HSS) flash with electronic shutter at speeds up to 1/60s. That would be impossible if the readout speed was any slower than 1/60s.
