This series of 24 images attempts to illustrate representative results from my own attempts at long lens technique (LLT). This is a frequently discussed issue on the various internet fora. With one or two exceptions, I don't ever recall anyone attempting to document their own results.

Setup configuration: G1410 + Wimberly head II (WH-200) + Wimberly P30 plate + Nikkor 300mm F/2.8 AFSII + TC17EII (working at 500mm F/4.8)

I shot two series of 12 images. The first series was shot at 1/10s F/9 ISO 160, which I consider marginal for my own skills. I would not attempt LLT at any slower speed (a Hail Mary shot notwithstanding). The second series was shot at 1/30s F/8 ISO400, a speed which I consider shoot-able with this lens working at 500mm. I do this all the time, and on a good day with fair consistency, subject motion issues aside.

In each series, I shot an image using an MC-20 remote in S mode (no mirror delay). The 2nd image was shot using the MC-20 in Mirror Up (Mup) mode. This was followed by 5 shots "machine gun" style. This is with both hands on the camera body, and squeezing the shutter button with a finger roll. This was followed by 5 shots using standard Long Lens Technique; left hand on the end of the lens (just in front of the hood), right hand on the camera/shutter, and my eye pasted on the viewfinder as best I could. I was wearing glasses at the time, which is not optimum for the eye pasted on the viewfinder part. In the real world, though, even with my contacts in, I am usually wearing sunglasses so the net result is probably very applicable to my real world shooting.

The entire sequence of shots was conducted in about 6 minutes. Each set of 5 attempts at each technique was shot within a 7-9 second interval, per my image exif. You may think that is rather fast, and so did I at the time, but I decided that in the real world, I often shoot this rapidly in an attempt to catch a critter at a critical instant in time. I did not shoot as if I were in a contest with a $1000 prize; I shot more or less casually, as I would do at my favorite wildlife venue.

All 24 shots are included in this composite image. The frames are numbered; the missing frames are blank frames I routinely shoot during complex tests to help segregate images.

I have often maintained that I can outshoot a camera on a self timer, or a remote without mirror delay, simply with my hands on the camera. What do you think?

At first glance, this turns everything we have ever read in any photography book upside down. Consider, however, that the standard advice to use a remote or self timer is usually in the context of short focal length lenses, and usually shooting landscapes. This is often left unsaid, but the typical general photography book is far removed from the realities of long lens shooting. I don’t know if LLT works with small collarless lenses. I’ve never tried. If I were shooting a slow shutter speed with a 12-100mm lens with a body that lacked mirror up, I would use the self timer too. In that case, the chances of my bungling the shot with my manual intervention is far greater than the chances of experiencing mirror slap vibrations, assuming a decent tripod used within it's real world payload capability (as opposed to that fable otherwise known as the manufacturers payload rating).

Of the 20 images shot with my hands on the camera, NOT ONE image was worse than the remote image without mirror delay. Some of the images are close to, if not equal to, the mirror up image. Some are about on par with the non-delayed remote image, or slightly better.

A special note. I have shot dozens, if not hundreds, of mirror up images just for my testing and practice. I have never ever seen such a pathetic excuse for a mirror up image as the first image at 1/10s. Most of my testing is done indoors to avoid wind. With a long lens that is especially problematic and my favorite artificial light source is broken and Office Depot no longer sells it. It was a hot and humid day, generally windless. There were moments of a light breeze and whatever breeze there was ran perpendicular to the optical axis, which is especially problematic. I suspect (and hope) that the rather poor mirror up image was a result of a slight breeze. The preceding non-delayed remote image was also particularly poor. Compare that to my Wimberly Vibration Test gallery; that test series was concluded just 15 minutes prior to the commencement of this test with the same gear configuration. Those images are probably more representative of typical Mirror Up performance. On the other hand, my machine gun and long lens technique images probably encountered the same light breeze.