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.

Short review of DXO Optics Pro 8

This week, DXO released DXO Optics Pro 8. Is this version better than the last version? Does is change anything about the drawbacks it has opposed to Lightroom? In this review I will focus on the things which are new.


DXO has never been the fasted program. But in this version. Processing 9 images took only 40 seconds on my system. As seen here (scroll down), this was for 8 images more than 60 seconds. Another big pro is the possibility to show noise reduction at zoom levels less than 75% makes it possible to do fast adjustments.

Adjusting settings is nearly instant at my system, but may vary per computer. But after all, it's much faster than version 7.5.

Image quality

Can I get more out of my RAW file? After some testing and tweaking, I can't find any differences. The recovery of Highlights has become much easier with the new controls:

The problem is that I can't recover more details from highlights. With Lightroom I still can get more dynamic range out of my RAW files.

The too heavy noise reduction is still there.

The new Smart Lightning functions are easy to use and much like Lightroom and other RAW processors. Combined with the smart autoexposure makes it easy to get all the details and quality out of you RAW files. Now DXO is nog working that awkward anymore.


DXO Optics Pro 8 does have few new functions. One is the printing function. It's handy to use, but because DXO is not very good as an image organiser, most people won't use it. 

Beside that there are a couple of new functions which finetune the things you can do with DXO:

Beside this. The interface has been updated. The new icons are a little bit modernised and more space is between them. 

All these changes makes it even easier to use DXO and makes it still my first choice for converting my RAW files. I hope DXO will now work on better image quality (recovering dynamic range) and a more subtle auto noise reduction. 

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.