Topic: Mirror slap/shake Nikon D200 (Read 9095 times)

blabla · « **on:** March 19, 2006, 08:00:46 am »

Hi, I'm new to this forum!

I'm a bit puzzled here: my new D200 has a LOT more mirror shake than my D100. I'm not able to get a very good photo handheld on the 1/8 - 1/30 range with "normal" focals (35, 50). I have been doing it very successfuly with the D100 for years, so I was expecting the same from the D200 (or better!).

If I use MLU is ok but there isn't much sense in using MLU handheld when taking people pictures in low light, unless we all agree to freeze until I take the picture :-(.

On a tripod I have the same problem with longer focals but MLU helps (at least for static objects).

Picture quality is so much better on the D200 that I would really like to keep it but this is really a problem to me (I always used M-series Leicas because of this). I have very firm hands (1/15 with a 85/1.8 is ok on my D100) but it just doesn't work with my D200.

Apart from the shake you see in photos, you can really feel the "kick" of the mirror when shooting, much more than with the D100... :-(.

Questions:

1) Anyone else felt the same when changing from the D100 to the D200? All reviews talk about how smooth the D200 mirror is, my mine slaps a lot more than my "humble" D100.

2) Maybe it's because it's new? Maybe the damping material will get softer with time? My D100 is 3 years old, so damping is probably softer by now...

3) Could it be my D200 is defective? Mirror out of balance? Bad damping material (doesn't look like it, the "sponge" near the focusing screen seems ok). Or I was VERY lucky with my D100? I am able to get as low in speed with the D100 as with my Leica M6 without shake.

I really feel bad about it... I'm planning to send it back and keep my old D100. But picture quality is oh so much better with the D200 when mirror shake is not a problem... :-(

Any suggestions?

Thank you very much for any information.

I don't know if we can post pictures here but I would be happy to clip a few and post, just for you people to see the difference... :-(

BJL · « **Reply #1 on:** March 20, 2006, 04:35:22 pm »

Maybe it is due to the faster mirror movement needed to get to 5fps, from the D100's 3fps? I believe that the Canon 20D has more mirror noise than the 10D, supposedly related to the same increase in frame rate.

viewfinder · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2006, 04:26:20 am »

blabla,....

you need to e-mail Ken Rockwell with this matter. He will almost certainly know the answers as he has used both cameras extensively and written much material about them on his excellent site;

http://www.kenrockwell.com/

gryffyn · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2006, 10:51:47 am »

Quote

I really feel bad about it... I'm planning to send it back and keep my old D100. But picture quality is oh so much better with the D200 when mirror shake is not a problem... :-(

Any suggestions?

Thom Hogan just posted his review of the D200 a few days ago. He makes some interesting comments regarding the sensitivity of the D200 to shake, and that it will require more stringent hand-holding technique to get maximal sharpness out of the unit. Makes sense to me....more pixels, means the same amount of shake will displace over more pixels and might result in less perceived sharpness.

Thom didn't make any mention of increased mirror slap....and given his credentials and experience with Nikon bodies, I think that he would have noticed it, if it was a common issue with the D200. Could be that your's is out of whack....or maybe it's just that the camera needs more attention to technique....

Thom's detailed article is here:

http://www.bythom.com/d200review.htm

There is also a thread on the subject over on the Nikonians board at:

http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/17398.html

I've found that I need to be more conscious of technique with my D200 than with my D100 to get maximal sharpness. You can't treat the D200 as a consumer-grade DSLR and expect it to perform well it seems.

Hope this helps a bit.

PS. Welcome to the forum! Nice to have another Nikonian kicking around to balance out all the Canonites that hang here.

blabla · « **Reply #4 on:** March 27, 2006, 09:09:53 am »

Quote

Thom Hogan just posted his review of the D200 a few days ago. He makes some interesting comments regarding the sensitivity of the D200 to shake, and that it will require more stringent hand-holding technique to get maximal sharpness out of the unit. Makes sense to me....more pixels, means the same amount of shake will displace over more pixels and might result in less perceived sharpness.

Thom didn't make any mention of increased mirror slap....and given his credentials and experience with Nikon bodies, I think that he would have noticed it, if it was a common issue with the D200. Could be that your's is out of whack....or maybe it's just that the camera needs more attention to technique....

Thom's detailed article is here:

http://www.bythom.com/d200review.htm

There is also a thread on the subject over on the Nikonians board at:

http://www.nikonians.org/dcforum/DCForumID202/17398.html

I've found that I need to be more conscious of technique with my D200 than with my D100 to get maximal sharpness. You can't treat the D200 as a consumer-grade DSLR and expect it to perform well it seems.

Hope this helps a bit.

PS. Welcome to the forum! Nice to have another Nikonian kicking around to balance out all the Canonites that hang here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60767\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank you all for the useful info!

After a large set of "real-life" shooting comparisons between the D100 and the D200, I just got back my D200 to the store and asked for a replacement (to see if that was a problem with mine) but they had none. The sales person gave me a refund and commented that they (the sales people) already had some feedback on the subject and several customers agreed with me...

He said that in fact the mirror is much faster (fps increase...).

I guess the D100 is better for handheld photos (I also have a D70s but my wife gets hold of it everytime!) and shooting RAW + Nikon CS 4.4, D100's quality is more than enough for me.

I had/have my share of Nikon cameras (FE, FM2n, F3, F-801s, F80 and even an EM, plus a D100 and a D70s!) and the D200 is the first Nikon to make me realize that SLRs _do_ mirror slap... I never felt much difference between all these Nikons (ok, the EM is worse than the F-801s in this regard, for instance... :-) and my Leicas (M3 and M6TTL). I had never understood all the fuss about mirror shake in SLRs vs. rangefinders. Well, I do now... :-(

As I really like to take handheld photos in low-light, even using fast lenses (35/2, 50/1.8, 20/1.

, the D100 gives me better photos: resolution is not everything... :-) (although the D200 wins hands down rgd mix lighting and high contrast scenes, if it wasn't for the small shake...)

Except for the mirror shake (and it could be my D200 that was defective!), my experience is that is _easier_ to get better photos with the D200 than the D100: exposure metering is better, autofocus is better, viewfinder is much better, the CCD seems to hold better detail in highlights, etc. 4+ years do make a difference...

Oh well, I'll just stick to my D100 and D70s and be happy with them!

Again, thanks for all the answers!

Let Biogons be Biogons · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2006, 11:21:53 am »

If you think the D200 is bad, you should take a look at the Canon 5D. I looked at these 2 cameras side by side and thought that the mirror slap/shake in the D200 was pretyy good. The 5D's mirror slap/shake, however, sounded and felt like a cheap $150 film camera. Very disappointing -- especially for the price asked. The D200 seemed comparatively pretty good to me for the price asked. Quite frankly, except for the $5000 plus DSLR's, quality in most DSLR's seems lacking (at least in comparision with film cameras in the same customer niche).

*please note, I own neither Canon or Nikon, and do not have an axe to grind with either of them :-)

crislafoto · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2006, 01:45:46 pm »

I'm also new to this forum. I've had a Nikon D100 since it came out and I've just acquired a Nikon D200. I run some test shots with the two cameras, same settings, same lens AND A TRIPOD! to eliminate any posible shake. what I see is the D200 has by far much better latitude - it has details in highlights and shadows, much better than the D100. But, the definition, the small details, the crispness of the D100 is much better.

Some of the shots I did with studio strobes and a tripod! I'll post some samples as soon as I can.

has anyone had a similar experience or is my D200 defective?

gryffyn · « **Reply #7 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:00:18 pm »

Quote

AND A TRIPOD! to eliminate any posible shake.

Just 'cause you used a tripod doesn't mean that there was no shake. How stiff/good is the tripod/mounting/head? How did you trigger the shutter (finger, remote release, timer)?

The D200 has almost double the resolution of the D100, and nothing short of perfect technique will give you ultra-sharp images as a result (check the URL's I provided in an earlier post which discuss the reasons for this).

I love my D200. If I do my part, the images are perfectly sharp. It's just not as forgiving as my D100 (which I still use).

bob mccarthy · « **Reply #8 on:** April 04, 2006, 02:20:59 pm »

The low mpxl (6mpxl) were inherently sharper "looking". The default settings were set up for in-camera processing being primarly near the end of the PP flow. The latest cameras are set up much softer with raw being the primary capture mode. It requires "significant" sharpening in post. When it's done right, the 10+ mpxl camera knock your socks off.

The latest cameras are also touchy in handholding technique. Of course this is a landscape forum and we only shoot off of tripods.

I have sharpness darn near full up (D2x) when doing jpegs.

Can you be confusing this with a lack of camera sharpness.

Bob

crislafoto · « **Reply #9 on:** April 14, 2006, 09:41:28 pm »

I'm still using the D200 with much better results. I guess what you say about the 6mpxl cameras being more sharper looking is quite right. pictures look sharper but also because they're more contrasty.
I don't think I should have any problems with the mirror shake since most of the pictures I do are in a studio using strobes - so speed is 1/125.

also I'm getting fond of the D200's ability to capture more subtle details in the highlights.

thanks

cristina

jani · « **Reply #10 on:** April 18, 2006, 05:31:45 pm »

Quote

If you think the D200 is bad, you should take a look at the Canon 5D. I looked at these 2 cameras side by side and thought that the mirror slap/shake in the D200 was pretyy good. The 5D's mirror slap/shake, however, sounded and felt like a cheap $150 film camera.

In that case, I'd hate to hear what you think of the 20D.

The 5D is far quieter than the 20D, and feels much more like a professional camera. It reminded me of the feeling I got when trying the 1D MkII and the Nikon D2x.

Of course, the mirror noise from the 20D is the major disappointment in this camera.

That being said, I don't think it's much more of an issue than the noise. I can't comment on the D200, since I've yet to lay my hands on it.

All this discussion shows is that there appears to be a lot of personal preference regarding mirror noise/slap.

But the 20D is probably the worst of the bunch.

Author Topic: Mirror slap/shake Nikon D200 (Read 9095 times)