# mirror lock up



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 16, 2013)

ive been experimenting with mirror lock up recently, and it got me thinking, i should probably do some tests!

though probably very un scientific, i found there to be absolutely no difference between 1. remote shutter press and 2. remote shutter press+mirror lock up.

there was a noticeable difference for the worse when pressing the shutter button manually with either the mirror up or down.

this test was done on a tripod indoors same focus/apeture/iso etc photographing some small writing on a side of a lens box. zooming in 100% onto same part of the picture.

is mirror lock up just a battery waste?

should you always use a remote shutter press for EVERYTHING? even hand held stuff if thats even possible ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 16, 2013)

What shutter speeds did you use? A lot of people think the benefit is with 'long' exposures, but not really. Fast and slow shutter speeds really don't benefit from MLU, whereas between around 1/20 and 0.5 s you should see a benefit. 

MLU + EFC is even better. See: http://krebsmicro.com/Canon_EFSC/index.html for examples.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 16, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> What shutter speeds did you use? A lot of people think the benefit is with 'long' exposures, but not really. Fast and slow shutter speeds really don't benefit from MLU, whereas between around 1/20 and 0.5 s you should see a benefit.
> 
> MLU + EFC is even better. See: http://krebsmicro.com/Canon_EFSC/index.html for examples.



Good point, ive just checked and they were all luckily manually set, at 1/4 !


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 16, 2013)

I found that the tripod weight was more important than mirror lockup. I have a pair of tripods.... the old heavy one moves a lot less than the new lightweight one.... but hang a weight off of the lightweight tripod and it gets very steady. I have a eyelet in the bottom of the central collumn that I attach to the camera bag with a length of light rope.... makes the setup much more stable.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 16, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> I found that the tripod weight was more important than mirror lockup. I have a pair of tripods.... the old heavy one moves a lot less than the new lightweight one.... but hang a weight off of the lightweight tripod and it gets very steady. I have a eyelet in the bottom of the central collumn that I attach to the camera bag with a length of light rope.... makes the setup much more stable.




surely if it was a bit windy your bag would be swaying all over the place? my tripods pretty sturdy and there was no hint of wind in my room or shake on my floor!


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 16, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > I found that the tripod weight was more important than mirror lockup. I have a pair of tripods.... the old heavy one moves a lot less than the new lightweight one.... but hang a weight off of the lightweight tripod and it gets very steady. I have a eyelet in the bottom of the central collumn that I attach to the camera bag with a length of light rope.... makes the setup much more stable.
> ...



I just tighten the rope enough for tension, but not enough to lift the bag into the air.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 16, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > What shutter speeds did you use?  A lot of people think the benefit is with 'long' exposures, but not really. Fast and slow shutter speeds really don't benefit from MLU, whereas between around 1/20 and 0.5 s you should see a benefit.
> ...


----------



## degies (Mar 16, 2013)

I normally only use it in low light situations and it does make a difference if you pixelpeep a bit. Normally I will have the camera on either a remote shutter or on a 2s delay. I sometimes use it in HDR as well. 
I have a Manfrotto Tripod and to get more stability I split the legs a bit wider as I don't carry weights or sandbags. Key to all of this for me is wind hitting the lens hood. If I work in low light I can see it in post if there was a bit of movement because I did not lock down the body properly. Camera and lens stability is about 85% for me in these situations with Mirror lockup about 10% That last 5% is this back-focus thing I am coming to grip with


----------



## Larry (Mar 17, 2013)

*Mirror Lock-up - importance w/ & w/o IS (Link)*



jimjamesjimmy said:


> ive been experimenting with mirror lock up recently, and it got me thinking, i should probably do some tests!
> 
> ...is mirror lock up just a battery waste?
> 
> ...should you always use a remote shutter press for EVERYTHING? even hand held stuff if thats even possible ?



Mirror Lock-up - importance w/ & w/o IS (Link) ???

The question is periodically raised as to whether-or-not MLU is needed "with modern equipment". One must remember that "modern" is used to describe current equipment at any time in history. The suggestion has been made that MLU is "no longer important" through the years, more so since about the '70's - '80's, increasingly as makers began to NOT-include it as a standard feature, and wished to convince us to be satisfied with their judgement.
Numerous professionals have tested equipment to determine to their OWN satisfaction the truth about this function.
The consensus bottom-line has indicated that when one seeks the absolute best image quality which their equipment can deliver, ...MLU should be used, if possible/appropriate to the shooting situation.
There have been a few pooh-poohers, but one can read various articles on the web, and make a judgement as to which writers are to be considered most-authoritative. My own study puts me solidly in the "use it" camp.
A web search on mirror lock-up will turn up much discussion.
One of the most thorough analysis has been done by a respected German nature photographer, Fritz Polking, and can/should, IMO, be read at the following link.
Go to Home page > Workshop 1 > Sharp Photographs.  It is a long page, with many test results and comment (MLU, IS, etc.):

http://www.poelking.com/index_e.htm

I have posted re. this link before. Apologies to those who find this info redundant.
HTH others,

Edit: There is also quite a bit of experienced and/or thoughtful discussion here:

http://photo.net/learn/nature/mlu

Larry


----------



## EOBeav (Mar 17, 2013)

I recently learned the value of mirror lock up from some knowledgeable individuals right here on CR Forum. Bottom line: If you're at a long-ish focal length (like using a 70-200mm lens) and your shutter speed is anywhere around the 1/20 second area, you'd better put it to use. I learned my lesson.

_Addendum_: This is assuming, of course, that you're already on a sturdy tripod, with no other movement (wind, shaky ground, etc...) and you're tripping the shutter remotely. If you're not doing those things, then mirror lock up probably won't help you.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 17, 2013)

so it seems that mirror lock up is in essence just a form of IS for fairly long focal lengths when locked off?

i always thought it would be good practice for landscapes , to help achieve best sharpness, but it seems, its almost irrelevant for that from what im reading,my unscientific tests seem to point towards that for a 50 85 24 focal length for around 1/4 to 1/40 sec so far.

definitely gonna use the live view trick, i think everyone should know about that!


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 17, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> so it seems that mirror lock up is in essence just a form of IS for fairly long focal lengths when locked off?
> 
> i always thought it would be good practice for landscapes , to help achieve best sharpness, but it seems, its almost irrelevant for that from what im reading,my unscientific tests seem to point towards that for a 50 85 24 focal length for around 1/4 to 1/40 sec so far.
> 
> definitely gonna use the live view trick, i think everyone should know about that!




It's not any form of IS for long focal lengths: as others have said, when the mirror flips up, violently as high speed is required, it slaps into it's foam buffer. The bigger the mirror the bigger the 'thwack'. ( so FF is worse than APS ). At fast shutter speeds the exposure of the chip (or film ) is so short, as the second curtain follows the first down ( or across ) leaving just a slit at any one time, that exposure is over before the effect of vibration is recorded. 

With long exposures, say over 1/2 sec, the vibration from the 'thwack' has settled whilst the exposure continues, ero the longer the exposure continues the less the vibration portion will have any effect. 

As others have pointed out the real danger exposure times are about 1/4 sec to about 1/35 sec. This is because the exposure time is long enough to record the vibration but short enough to influence the whole exposure. As with any kind of camera vibration the effect will be magnified by a longer lens. 

To get a razor sharp image with a tele lens outside at about 1/8 sec your going to need no wind, rock steady camera mount, clear air ( no moisture diffusion ) , mirror locked up, remote release and all the other things that make a sharp picture !


----------



## EOBeav (Mar 17, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> so it seems that mirror lock up is in essence just a form of IS for fairly long focal lengths when locked off?



No. They're two totally different things.



> i always thought it would be good practice for landscapes , to help achieve best sharpness, but it seems, its almost irrelevant for that from what im reading,my unscientific tests seem to point towards that for a 50 85 24 focal length for around 1/4 to 1/40 sec so far.



Those would be focal length/shutter speed combinations that occasionally get used in landscape photography.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 17, 2013)

youve missed my point, IN ESSENCE i wrote, i understand that that mirror lock up is different to IS but they are both trying to make your images sharper, or with less blur! 

people are saying the dangers are for shutter speeds of 1/4 to 1/35 of a second, but in my tests within those times, it made no difference.

im just trying to find out what shutter speeds with what focal lengths its worth using it for, which i guess ill have to just individually test for each of my lenses and different shutter speeds, as everything im reading or hearing is just contradicting each other! but so far with my 85 and below focal lengths it seems irrelevant for any shutter speed.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 17, 2013)

I suppose you could argue MLU is a form of IS using your logic. 

You don't state which camera you're using. If it's APS with an 85mm lens shooting something close to the camera then I'm not surprised there's no camera shake without MLU. Using the self timer is a good way to ensure a vibration free shutter release.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 17, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> im just trying to find out what shutter speeds with what focal lengths its worth using it for, which i guess ill have to just individually test for each of my lenses and different shutter speeds, as everything im reading or hearing is just contradicting each other! but so far with my 85 and below focal lengths it seems irrelevant for any shutter speed.



Camera shake, whether due to handholding or mirror slap, causes some amount of physical motion of the image sensor relative to the scene, resulting in angular blur. Whether or not that blur can be perceived depends of the amount of angular motion relative to the angle of view. That's the basis of the 1/focal length guideline (and why the crop factor must be applied to that estimate). Since the amplitude of mirror slap is fixed, the narrower the AoV (longer focal length), the more pronounced the effect, and vice versa. Other factors, like tripod stability and damping capability, play a role. 

From a practical standpoint, MLU may help and may not, but it will never hurt. So, time permitting there's no real reason not to use it (except maybe battery life, not a concern for me, at least). 

As stated, Live View is an even better option.


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 17, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> i
> 
> If it's APS with an 85mm lens shooting something close to the camera then I'm not surprised there's no camera shake without MLU



how does an object close to a camera induce the camera to shake?

6d


----------



## jimjamesjimmy (Mar 18, 2013)

thanks for the replys

i just find it amazing its only now that ive realised MLU is almost pointless for a lot of shots, i get what your saying that you might aswell do it just in case, but nowhere ive read in all the tutorials/magazine article or youtube videos says that MLU is only relevant for certain focal lengths etc, and its even more amazing that this live view thing isnt more widely talked about.

thanks again


----------



## bdunbar79 (Mar 18, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > i
> ...



It doesn't. He's saying he's NOT surprised there's no camera shake. Objects farther away will be more adversely affected by camera shake vs. objects closer.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 18, 2013)

Exactly. The more the subject fills the frame the easier it is to achieve perceived sharpness.


Also maybe on the 6D the mirror is better damped on its lifting stroke than say the 5D mk1 and 2. I've seen a slow mo vid of the 5D mk1's mirror flipping up and it actually bounces on it's buffer about three times before settling ! 

If youre not seeing any shake at around 1/20 sec I'd say that's top marks to the 6D. 

Probably another subtle improvement built into the camera that no one is aware of !!


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 18, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> thanks for the replys
> 
> i just find it amazing its only now that ive realised MLU is almost pointless for a lot of shots, i get what your saying that you might aswell do it just in case, but nowhere ive read in all the tutorials/magazine article or youtube videos says that MLU is only relevant for certain focal lengths etc, and its even more amazing that this live view thing isnt more widely talked about.
> 
> thanks again


There is an engineering term called "black aluminum". It is a reference to using material A in the same way that you would use material B. For example, when they first started making carbon fibre bicycle frames, they used the carbon fibre like they used steel.... they made it into tubes and glued the tubes into frames. This made a pathetic bicycle frame that was very prone to catastrophic failure... when they started using carbon fibre to it's strengths by molding the entire frame at once and with swoopy lines they ended up with a far superior product. 

You have to realize that digital photography is still fairly new and there are a lot of people out there who learned on film. That learning affects the way people think about things.... like shutters. Film cameras had mirrors and shutters.... and they moved and shaked. There was no "live view" so when these people talk about minimizing shake they don't consider it. It's that "black aluminum" thing all over again.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 18, 2013)

But when shooting from Live View you are using MLU


----------



## motorhead (Mar 18, 2013)

jimjamesjimmy said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > I found that the tripod weight was more important than mirror lockup. I have a pair of tripods.... the old heavy one moves a lot less than the new lightweight one.... but hang a weight off of the lightweight tripod and it gets very steady. I have a eyelet in the bottom of the central collumn that I attach to the camera bag with a length of light rope.... makes the setup much more stable.
> ...



The "trick" is to have the bag just touching the ground, or hung using a bungy cord. That way the tripod is pulled down to steady it and the bag cannot sway about.


----------

