Note - This post is copied from one which is out-of-place, having evolved during discussion in another thread. The subject had turned to MLU's desirability for those seeking best-quality images. Here:http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....c=20367&st=200&
Those with little use for MLU (or who BELIEVE that there is little use for it,) might consider these points:
1. A programmed camera is not always an effective substitute for a thinking photographer. This means that when a "self-timer" is controlling the moment of capture (2 sec. delay?, 10 sec. delay? 30 sec. shut-down?), any sort of peak-moment capture is reduced to a wild guess. Hardly a "professional" feature. IMO, this is no "work-around. It is a poor imitation of user-control.
[ Here are four (A-D)of many possible scenarios;
A. You are using a tripod mounted long tele with remote release pre-focused on a distant offshore rock upon which waves break spectacularly. You wish the rocks(mermaid, whatever,) to be as sharp as possible, with whatever softness to the water you may create by your choice of shutter speed. You wish to capture the moment of peak splash height, like ...,...,...NOW! Oops, ...the self timer missed it by a mile (maybe because it "timed-out", un-noticed after some designer-decided 30 sec. limit).
B. Same set-up, different target. The osprey/eagle/pterodactyl is about to land on the edge of the nest, fish-in-beak, wings spread and claws out-stretched for touchdown, matching the outstretched necks of the fledglings straining to receive dinner. Another "NOW!" moment. Is the blind self-timer going to guess it correctly? My Donkey!]
C. Target - birds at feeder. Anyone know how quickly flitting birds can move from the "perfect pose" shot to a wasted one? The camera doesn't, that's for sure.
D. Two wild mountain rams at the moment of butting impact, dust flying from foreheads, some hooves off ground? A distant, very "Now!" moment. Perhaps capturable by YOU (especially with 8-10 FPS), ...but not with programmed interference form a self-timer.
Control means control!
2. Opinions differ as to MLU usefulness at any given shutter speed. However, anytime there is a POTENTIAL benefit from MLU, there is no arguing this fact:
Reduced or "damped" mirror vibration is not the same thing as ELIMINATED mirror vibration. Canon's providing real MLU would "admit" nothing except this incontrovertible fact. [ As to the nebulosity of MLU usefulness -- For an in-depth study of MLU effectiveness under various conditions, timings, focal-lengths, etc. done by a serious, careful and skilled photographer, see first link below.]
3. Real user-controlled MLU was not limited to only the "top" models, at least in the case of Minolta in the early 70's (late 60's?). The SRT line was below their briefly offered "pro" model (can't remember the model designation).
There have been numerous studies of MLU usefulness. Here is a link to what I consider one of the most thorough (The entire site is well worth visiting, ...and there is some intriguing Nikon vs. Canon opinion from this experienced pro.)
Fritz Polking index (See Workshop I - "Sharp Photographs"): http://www.poelking.com/index_e.htm
Sadly, this renowned photographer/author is now deceased. Notice is here:
Polking Passing (July 23, '07)-http://www.digitalphotopro.com/news/master...lking-dies.html
Bottom line for me;
Give us back real user controlled (and simple) MLU. "Flip",...it's up. "Flip" it's down. I'll decide when.
Canon, this user will trade you one facial-recognition "feature" for one real MLU anyday!
Opinion. Correction welcome, as always,