Skip to main content

Shuttershock and Olympus 75-300

Since a couple of months I own the Olympus 75-300 III. And since day one, I wasn't happy with the results I got. 
All the pictures shot at +/- 300 mm where soft and looked like there was motion blur. How's that possible? I tried it at a 1/1000th of a second, but still the motion blur in my pictures. I regret that I ever sold my Pentax with the 55-300 for this awfull lens!
But... Most reviews of this lens are positive. Is my copy of this lens bad?
I then figured out by reading forums that it could be a phenomena called 'shuttershock'. It that case, the shock of the shutter causes enough movement so the image is blurred.
For example:

How to fix this?
My camera has several drive modes, including one called 'anti-shock'. And that does magic.
In that mode The pictures are sharp again. No motion blur is visible! 
The downside of this mode is that the fasted drivemode can't be used.

Microsoft Image Composite Editor review

Many people like making panoramas. Many P&S camera's have panorama functions inside. Also some dSLR camera's have a function to make them. But not all camera's have a function to do that. Microsoft ICE  is software for making panorama's from your photo's. In the last version there's also a function to make panorama's from video files!

The software hasn't many options to change the result. There are no manual stitching options. But the build-in function of camera's don't have either.

I tested the software with a video and  with 41! pictures.

The results are depending on the input. With the video it's very important  to move slowely, because the stills are not sharp after fast movement. Because this video (and photo's) was not made with a very good rotation (not in the nodal point) the objects in the front are not stitched very well.

From photo

From video

As you can see is the dynamic range from the pictures bigger. Also the video stitch has more failures. But the result is impressive. When shooting video of a landscape or other far way subjects the results are great!

The speed of ICE is one of the biggest advantages over the competition. The rendering of the 41 pictures only took 1,5 minutes. With the video it took 2 minutes!

After the stitching some settings can be done:

cropping: automatic or manual
export: choose the quality of the file format and you can also resize the output.

The file formats you can choose from are jpeg, tiff, adobe, bitmap and  png. You can also choose two hd formats. You can choose them to work with HD view sl or HD view. That's for showing your panorama with hight quality and high speed inside your webbrowser.

Another example

The videofile containing the image information. This video was shot with a Canon Digital Ixus 750 (6 years old with vga video)

First result

Result after some PP


This software is easy to use and is capable of great results. For getting great results you need the right input material. Because you can't edit the stitching anyway.

Popular posts from this blog

DXO Optics Pro vs. Corel Aftershot Pro

After using Aftershot Pro for a couple of days, I made this comparison to DXO Optics Pro 7. The difference is really clear. The colors in DXO (on the left) are much more realistic than the colors in Aftershot Pro (on the right).The settings where with the default settings with some tweaking for the contrast, exposure and noise reduction. (WB, saturation etc where left to default settings).
In the first picture, I could get the colors and contrast right with Aftershot Pro, with DXO I had to tweak the contrast, but after all, the picture is really nice and natural.

In this picture, at first view, I really like the version from Aftershot Pro. But this picture isn't real. The saturation of the picture is to much and the contrast unreal. The DXO version is a little bit foggy, but more like reality. With some tweaking of the curves, the DXO version will pop a little bit more.

This one shows the biggest difference. Removing chromatic aberrations. With DXO it was very simple, even if the…

Adobe Lightroom 4 vs. DXO Optics Pro 7

One day ago, Adobe released Lightroom 4.0. Two months ago, DXO released DXO Optics Pro 7. These two updates changed a lot in both software. How do they compare?
I'm using DXO Optics Pro for quite a while. I really like the simplicity and results. For landscape and nature photography the build in HDR tools are great. The possibilities to gain details from highlights is unsurpassed. The lack of speed of version 6 has been fixed in version 7. 
Is DXO still my favorite, or does Lightroom beat it? That question will I answer on the end. First of all I will compare them.
workflowLightroom is still the best workflow tool on the marketWorkflow is not the best in DXO. You need a tool like Picassa to do the file managementwinner: Lightroom, DXO doens't have real workflow toolsimage qualityLightroom gets very much detail from images, the lens correction is okay, but not very good,DXO get's a little less details from my images, but the lens correction tools are the best ever se…

Lightroom vs. DXO. vs. Photodirector

A little comparison of three RAW-converters. This comparison is not about how the program themselves works, but about the result of how one RAW-file is processed.

The version of the software I used:

DXO Optics Pro: 6.5
Adobe Lightroom: 3
Cyberlink Photodirector: 2011
For this test I used a photo of a little owl posted before on this weblog. The picture was a little underexposed and with a cheap lens (Tamron AF 70-300mm Di F/4.0-5.6 Macro 1:2). So there's work to do for the RAWconverter.