• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Earth rotation limiting stabilisation to 6.5 f stops


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 910 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 27 September 2016 - 07:48 AM

At lest this is what olympus claims  : "he in-body stabilisation itself gives 5.5 steps, and the Sync IS gives 6.5 steps with OIS lenses. 6.5 stops is actually a theoretical limitation at the moment due to rotation of the earth interfering with gyro sensors."

 

http://www.43rumors....on-to-65-stops/



#2 popo

popo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,334 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 27 September 2016 - 10:19 AM

Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to correct for that also. Assuming the camera has GPS you know the latitude and altitude and thus how the camera is moving due to the Earth. The correction then needs to consider the direction in which the camera is pointed relative to the motion. Give some engineer good at maths a large mug of coffee and you're done.

 

I might have simplified things a bit there, as I don't know what level of precision is needed to be effective. The sensors like those in smartphones are crude and there will likely need to be extra filtering to eliminate short term interference. 


dA Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.


#3 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 919 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 12:40 PM

Dang just our luck; we're stuck on a planet that spins too fast.


  • southerncross likes this

#4 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 27 September 2016 - 01:00 PM

I only take pictures in total darkness and am now up to 300 f-stops with no visible shake!  B)

 

If there really has to be some light involved, sticky tape and some pounds of superglue is sufficient.



#5 josa

josa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

Posted 27 September 2016 - 03:57 PM

Phew! Ican stop spinning the whole planet just like the Superman!!! However my head is spinning all the time...



#6 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,334 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 28 September 2016 - 07:51 AM

We gotta find a flat Earth instead.



#7 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,372 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 28 September 2016 - 08:03 AM

A flat eart would not move?



#8 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 28 September 2016 - 08:27 AM

Don't you know, disc-world is carried by 4 elephants standing on the back of a big turtle, floating through space. And when it's sun went down, it goes between the elephants and start all over again for the next day. Oh, and the cameras are little boxes witha fast painting gnome (?) inside, who occassionally runs out of color.

 

Okay, you don't know. Pity, it's about fantasy and humour...

 

:D



#9 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,334 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 28 September 2016 - 11:09 AM

So Canon haven't fed theirs quite as well as the other producers, hence the limited dynamic range of their cameras (that everybody and their grandmothers have been talking about). runner.gifrunner.gifrunner.gif



#10 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 28 September 2016 - 03:12 PM

Honestly, I didn't understand why the thing matters... Do they suppose that, while taking the exposure, the camera moves independently of the planet rotation, because the photographer's body compensate for it?


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#11 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,372 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 28 September 2016 - 03:23 PM

A gyroscope will work against any movement, so also earth's rotation. The gyro sensors will pick up on this and want to compensate for that movement, which should not be compensated for.



#12 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 28 September 2016 - 04:04 PM

At first it was another idea for a stupid sentence of me, but I rethought: Some drones have a very very precise positioninig system. Anybody aware of how they would do at long time exposures? Their rotors are already sort of gyroscopes, the cameras sit on elastic mounted platforms: if there's no or not much wind and no additional shutter/mirror slap that might be all what's needed - and watching the sample pictures at the 12-100 Oly zoom, it can't be worse to do it with a drone  B)

 

And moving the drone to the correct height would save the perspective correction, too, but this was now stupid again  ^_^



#13 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,334 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 28 September 2016 - 07:26 PM

The drones have amazing stabilization (at least the one I was using - or rather, partook in using). I mean, when shooting, it is suspended high up in the air, where the minute movements are unavoidable - and wind gusts too - but it returned 100% sharp shots at the exposures of 1/25 seconds. A remarkable amount of detail as well - that drone's 12 megapixels were miles above the mush that my supposedly 12 megapixel smartphone camera is returning, and way better than any "digicam" I've ever used - it looked more like SLR quality. To top it all of, we were shooting at dusk. It's a pity I would suck at piloting - I can totally see why the drone photography is all the rage now.


  • JoJu likes this

#14 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 28 September 2016 - 10:09 PM

The first idea of using aerial gear came to my mind when I read about "kite photography". But it was too dangerous and risky for the equipment, so I passed over. Drones are tempting... 


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#15 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 28 September 2016 - 10:24 PM

I found this comparison between Phantom 4 and Mavic amazing; https://youtu.be/0YJ8WhQzaSM such a tiny device...






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de