Printing Nikkor 105mm And Fotodiox Rhinocam

I should have fixed that composition in post editing I only picked it up after I had up loaded it to Photobucket. It is annoying I fixed it in the original( But I am not uploading it again)

One comment as I have pushed the envelop I have become more and more demanding of my rig. Small issues I ignored in the past have become major problems with this technique. My rig as it stands to day is only just capable of these shots.

As I mentioned last week the base board was swapped out for a Granite slab weighing around 64 Lbs. It sits on Sorbothane feet. I went a step further and the table with bench style legs (with a stretcher) is now sitting on two concrete pedestals( 400mm X 400 mm X30mm pavers each weighing 15 kg). I spent 2 hours leveling the table and rig. Standard shots are now much better but I still have frustrations. Chinese machining is no longer worth it... I avoid Chinese adapters etc as much as possible resorting where ever possible to American Russian, German/Austrian made gear for crucial components. Now there is nothing sweeter than a clamp or adapter that performs exactly as it should! At the same time an adapter that is just out on its tolerances is hugely frustrating!

That comment certainly doesn't apply to my rig the heavy weight and sobothane feet only control external vibration. My rig sits on the second floor even though that floor is seismic block it can be a real pain when a car drives down the street. The extra weight with sorbothane isolates external vibrations. It does nothing for internal vibrations such as shutter and mirror shock( Doesn't apply to either of my cameras one is mirrorless the other has a fixed beam splitter instead of a movable mirror). My camera has certain shutter speeds I have to avoid ( like 1/125 second). My replacement camera budgeted for in September will have both optional EFCS ( half electric) and more importantly a fully Electronic shutter option

The comment was so far from my aims with the granite slab I had to go back to the "text book" and check
I based my rigs design on Savazzi (2011) "Digital Photography for Science" and Lefkowitz (1982) " The Manual of Close up Photography" Lefkowitz on page 158 describes creating a rig for reducing external vibrations using a 45 KG slab of rock sitting on inflated inner tubes on page 158. Savazzi , From memory ( I will re edit this post when I find the actual page numbers) states the same thing.

Edit: Savazzi recommends the granite and Sorbothane feet on pages 650 - 653 under the sub heading "Controlling floor vibration". He goes so far as the refer to Lefkoowitz's recommendation. I got the idea for the sorbothane feet from Savazzi's book: the section just referenced. When I read the recommendation I figuratively kicked my self as I knew how good Sorbothane fee were for hi fi systems!

I did read and I read it again and again! It still makes little sense to me. Yes you stated the weight protects from external vibration but how does EFCS protect from environmental vibration? That, to me is the logical conclusion from your first sentence that I had put in quotes. The sentence seems completely out of context and very misleading!

My experience with my sony A65 ( has EFCS) has shown me no evidence of protection from external vibration). My understanding of how EFCS suggest that EFCS has no use at all in dealing with external vibration

So please explain how EFCS compensates for external vibration. The only way it might help is if you used high shutter speeds. I can achieve acceptable hand held coin shots by racking up the ISO and shutter speed but the A7r produce's a lot less noise at high ISO in comparison to many other cameras( as long as I don't go over 8000).

It seems to me if the camera or subject move during a shot( environmental vibration) efcs is not going to stop blurring from occurring. I would add my understanding is EFCS is only good for reducing shutter shock( It doesn't eliminate it), you need a fully electronic shutter to completely remove shutter shock from the equation.

One thing to make clear the Granite slab cost about US$12.00 the Sorbothane feet just under US$25.00 with postage and the only other cost was four drill bits @ US$6.00. All up turning my rig in something akin( not like) to an optical table cost US$61.00

I have to repeat what you said. I just seems so contrary to every thing I have researched and read over several months:





With your most recent comment it is clear that you believe that the extra weight I added actually controls for shutter shock and by, I believe reasonable, inference; mirror shock. I just can not understand how a granite slab and sorbothane feet can have any effect on mechanical factors that are internal to the camera.

If you are correct then its great news as it is much cheaper to use a camera without EFCS and just rely on the granite slab and Sorbothane feet.


please clarify as at the moment that quote reads to me very much like the running windex joke in the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"

I take that reply as a tacit acknowledgement that the statement I took issue with was wrong. EFCS is useful but it is not a cure all. And it does not do anything to fix external vibrations likewise making a heavy vibration dampened rig does not control for vibrations created within the camera

I would also like to clarify there are two types of vibration sources. Internal to the camera ( mirror shock in the old fashioned DSLR technology) and shutter shock/shake. Mirror lock up in DSLR limits mirror vibrations. An Electronic Front Curtain shutter reduces shutter shock( but doesn't eliminate it). As RMPSRMPS has pointed out in a forum separate to this one even the electrical system relating to the shutter operation can cause vibration( I completely accept that as occurring it was intriguing reading)

There are cameras coming to the market now that have fully electronic shutters, they should make EFCS appear as an interesting old fashioned approach.

Now RMPSRMPS may have left the impression that only if your macro rig is on a second floor of a building do you need to worry about external vibration. The experts I read (https://goccf.com/t/235824) noted that external vibrations can even be a problem in a basement of the building. A furnace, air conditioning, dish washer and clothes washing machine are all sources of annoying vibration.

For those on a limited budget A granite/concrete slab and sobothane feet (or partially inflated small diameter inner tubes) is a very cheap way of creating a vibration dampened macro rig. However it won't be perfect as there will be a frequency that will cause resonance in the rig. Apparently you can tune the rig to avoid the most damaging vibrations. I have not got to the point of understanding how to do that yet.

I had thought my rig stable until I first tried adding a 15 kg weight( cost US$3.00) to my rig with the sorbothane feet... the improvement really impressed me. The 29kg granite slab( cost less than US$15.00) has also shown an improvement over the 15kg weight but not as marked. What is a real bonus is the 4 foot square working area I now have.

Its important to understand that the references note that what will appear to be vibration free at close up magnifications( 1-1 or less) may well be found to be unacceptable at macro magnifications 1X< 10X( I may be wrong with the cut off between macro and Micro). Likewise What may be acceptable at 10X may be useless at 20X.

Well I don't think it was misinterpreted as it was an inappropriate statement that is best understood as hyperbole. The only reason one would add extra mass in the way I described is to control external vibration. To then make your first sentence in reply that EFCS ( which controls for shutter shock a form of internal vibration) renders such modifications unnecessary is akin to saying improving the suspension of a car makes it go faster. Yes it can but there are so many other factors to consider before (and in conjunction with) adjusting the suspension. I would never trust any mechanic who said "if you make this modification to the suspension then you don't need to do anything else to increase the cars top speed. I view your comment regarding EFCS in that light!

Using the term "unnecessary" is down right wrong in this context. It is wrong because there are many other factors to take into account. EFCS can assist, but that assistance is dependent on many factors which can include:

1 How stable the rig is.
2. How rigid the connection between the camera and the baseboard is:
a 3/8th and 1/4 inch mounting screws are less than ideal. Swiss arca clamps can often prove to be much more reliable.
3. how the different parts of the rig connect together. I have found it necessary to remove all rubber pads from mounting points as they have proved to be too flexible( this is following the recommendations of others in written references)
4. How effective the EFCS in your camera actually is...there have been reports of some DSLRs having EFCS that introduced vibration due to bad design