greyswan wrote in post #19408229
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. As a point of interest, the image is cropped quite a bit. I usually use my R in mechanical shutter, but wanted to play with the ES for the higher fps. There's not much room in the R for adjusting the fps either unfortunately (or if there is, I missed it).
I'd suspect the severity on this image is due to the FF sensor, more acreage to write on. I was thinking because of the smaller pixels and crop size, maybe that would not be a big problem on the R7. I have seen several posts noting the problem in sports mostly, with oval balls for instance, even on the r7, which makes me wonder how problematic it would be for birders.
I think what we have with birds is the fact that most of their motions are not super-fast over a significant vertical distance in the frame, but there are just some times when they use high-velocity wing beats for emergency-type situations. This one seems to be a balance correction, as the bird's left wing is not moving the same.
It looks like the total vertical wing range during the exposure was about 1/4 the frame; 1/100s if the R rolling shutter is 1/25s, 1/120s if it is 1/30s If you had used the R7 for this shot, the time would have been longer, because instead of being 1/4 the height of the frame, it would have been 40% of 1/30, or about 1/75s. That does not mean that the apparent wing size would have been taller, though. The tallness is due to the wing and roll speeds being very close, so this particular artifact may not be "taller" with a slower roll; distorted, but different than this.
A friend of mine shoots birds with the Olympus OM-1, and she's never had a problem with rolling shutter, due to the M4/3rds sensor I would assume.
Like I said, it would be nice if there was a good reference on all the rolling shutter speeds. You could look up the values and compare camera; you just have to remember that optically, you may fill the frame differently with different sensors.
I was kind of curious as to whether people could give a ballpark figure on their experiences with RS on their mirrorless, regardless of model, it would be interesting to see how much of a problem this is in real life across the board. Exif here doesn't show if ES was used on posted images.
I will most likely still be getting the r7 for the amazing eye AF though.
Experience is going to vary more than rolling shutter speeds, I'm afraid. One person with a 1/60 rolling shutter might complain more than another person with a 1/25s rolling shutter. Unfortunately, people with the most capable optics in terms of focal length, who crop the least but shoot very fast-moving subjects, will have the most problems with rolling shutter, in general. If you were 4x as far from that bird with the same optics, it would have looked far more normal, even with the same rolling shutter, and it would take 4x the wing speed to get this effect.