Hand-held or tripod?

[Makaze]

What shutter-speed would you consider the cut off point between being able to hold the camera steady enough by hand and needing a tripod for a clear shot?

[CDM]

That depends on the individuals, and practise can drive the cut off point to even lower shutter speed. The tank lights of mine give me 1/8s to 1/35s (most of the time). But, I never used tripod when taking aqua pics.

[benny]

The general guide given is the acceptable hand held shutter speed should be inversely proportional to the focal length of the lens. For example, if you are shooting at 50mm, then the minimum shutter speed will 1/60 sec (since there isn't a 1/50 sec). This guide is valid only for 35mm format.

Cheers,

[CDM]

Hey benny, yours is more pros talk!!! [smilie=c:

[benny]

Hey benny, yours is more pros talk!!! [smilie=c:

Nah...I just regurgitated the stuff from the books.

Cheers,

[Makaze]

Hmmm, so how do you figure out what the equivalent of a 50mm lens (or any other size) is on a digital camera?

[Twilo]

Hmmm, so how do you figure out what the equivalent of a 50mm lens (or any other size) is on a digital camera?

Your camera has a 3 x optical zoom i think. I think it should equate to a focal length of 35-105mm.

[Makaze]

Yeah, the A70 has a 3x zoom. Although, I don't think its the same as 3x zoom on a 35mm. 3x zoom on this camera (which I guess is 16.2mm focal length according to the EXIF info on my pics) seems to be more like a 1:1 ratio rather than an actual zoom. At least, it makes objects in the view-finder appear roughly the same size as with the naked eye. Seems like they ought to advertise that as a 1/3x - 1x zoom, rather than implying that it actually magnifies objects.

[meriadoc]

technically - that inverse proportion really only works with the shorter focal lengths - when you get to the 100mm + range, normally you aim for twice the focal length for handheld for example :

100mm : 1/200
200mm : 1/400
300mm : 1/600

etc etc etc

of course, there are many factors that affect that, like the lens speed (maximum aperture, ie ƒ2.8, ƒ4.0 etc.), and just how sturdy you are at hand-holding, oh, and if you're a lucky one and have image stabilization in the lens (the image stabilization {IS} in the camera body isn't as effective as the in-lens IS systems)

clear as mud?

[benny]

technically - that inverse proportion really only works with the shorter focal lengths - when you get to the 100mm + range, normally you aim for twice the focal length for handheld for example

Interesting....any literature to share?

I would like to read up more on this as none of the publications I've read mentioned this about about twice the focal length beyond 100mm.

Cheers,

[meriadoc]

As I said, there are many factors in determining the minimum shutter speed - I was just trained to be a little more cautious - and there are wildlife photographers that think the same way - mainly because of the movement in the longer lenses - minor movement on the camera end equates to more movement on the front of the lens end - a photo taken at 1/500 with a 500mm lens may (and could quite possibly) generate a slight blur - giving the photo a blurry look to it (naturally).

But then, it also depends on the physical length of the lens. As you know, you can have two lenses the same focal length, but one may be longer than the other, thus throwing the theory out the window.

Its not a matter of reading books (in fact, I have very little photography books - I can't stand the rules that they give to make photos look better), its a experience thing.

Now, I'm not saying you're inexperienced with photography, you might very well have significant experience in it, but I'm calling on my 10+ years of photography (a few years being semi-pro also), and what knowledge I've gained through trial and error.

See, if you have a lens with image stabilization in it, you can very well hold a 200mm lens and shoot at 1/100th of a second - that is IF you've got the IS turned on. If not, it could very well be at 1/200th or more.

Now, subject speed also comes into play. Tried taking a photo of a cheetah with a 300mm lens when its moving full speed? Not gonna happen. You'd HAVE to shoot at a higher frame to get it right. Or shooting from a car - once again, a higher shutter speed.

the 1x focal lenth shutter speed thing is fine for stationary objects - but not for moving targets so to speak ;)

I'll find some books on the matter - as I said, there are many schools of thought on this subject, I'm just sharing my knowledge (and experience through trial and error).

-- L

[benny]

Hey Lisa,

Relax! I'm just trying to find out more, especially if it's something I've not heard about before. Afterall, in APF, it's about sharing what you learn here and we appreciate you sharing your knowledge (and experience through trial and error). We all learn that way. Books are too expensive anyway, I rather pay for lenses. [smilie=lol.gif]

Back to the subject...

I can understand that the higher the shutter speed, the safer it will be for a sharp picture. Given the general nature of the question in the first post (not discounting the fact that it may not even be an SLR), the generic answer would have been a shutter speed inversely proportional to the focal length of the lens used.

Personally, if I'm shooting wtih 200mm focal length, I will use shutter speed above 1/250 seconds at the minimum, often higher. That's being cautious and going above the recommended guide but not a guide in itself.

However, I can understand that if long (pro) lenses that makes the camera setup "front heavy", you have to compensate for it if you are not using tripod. This is usually done by improving your handheld techniques, not by mere increasing the shutter speed. Even at F2.8 on a 200 mm lens, using an ISO of 3200, there are instances where you just can't use 1/500 sec shutter speed simply because there is not enough light.

I started with the fully manual Canon AE-1 in 1978. The guidelines for handheld shutter speed were pretty much the same then. As for Image Stablisation technology, I will not touch on this although I do have experience with them as it's over and above the basic photography techniques we are discussing here. But I will agree that with the new IS lenses such as the Canon EF 70-200 F2.8 USM IS, you can have up to 3 stops of speed compensation. Older technology only gives you up to 2 stops previously. Incidentally, the Canon AE-1 is still with me and works like a charm although hardly used these days. Kept it for sentimental value. Same with my medium format gear since I've stop shooting commercially 7 years ago. I still look at my slides from wildlife shoots from Southern Africa, Antarctica and the Himalayas. Once I get round to buying a slide scanner, perhaps we can compare notes.

As for moving subjects (like cheetah, motorbikes or football players), getting them sharp requires a knowledge of panning technique. Higher shutter speed will only allow you to try to freeze it in motion, together with the surroundings, and totally losing any sense of motion. With effective panning techniques applied with a telephoto lens, and assuming the subject is in linear motion, you can even reduce your shutter speed by 1 stop less than the guideline and still get a pin sharp subject with a blurred background. But this is not relevant to the questioned asked in the first post so I will not digress further.

In summary and with reference to the original question, be it digital or flim, SLR or compact, short or long focal length, the subject will be blurred when shot handheld if you are not able to eliminate hand induced shake. I would say the general guideline is to use a shutter speed at least inversely proportional to the focal length of the lens used.

Cheers,

[meriadoc]

Yeah, I'd rather pay for lenses too!

sorry about being on the offensive or defensive, what ever it was - It's just been one of those weeks unfortunately - and i get more defensive normally because i deal with this kind of stuff every day with my job ;)

[mechanic]

Hi all.
I find the info in this post very informative.
It does bring up a observation though.
I use a minolta xg-m with a star-d 80-210mm zoom.
I've taken alot of pics of still wildlife with the zoom set on max.
When I use my flash as "fill" the synch. speed is 1/60.
I don't own a tripod,all my shots are unsupported freehand.
I have yet to get a picture that's blurry from shutter speed.
Does anyone have any thoughts on why?
The general rule says shutter speed should be 1/250?
I'm fairly new at this so laymans terms would be greatly appreciated.
Later
Eric

[alanhill]

To answer the last question first: an electronic flash produces a very brief flash of light (usually <1/1000 second) so provided the subject is mainly illuminated by the flash, there will be no visible sign of movement. If you are mixing flash and natural light (sometimes called 'fill-in flash') you can get additional ghost like images if the subject or the camera moved during the natural light exposure - at one time this effect was popular with some fashion photographers - the exact appearance depends on when the flash fires during the time that the shutter is open (the synchronisation).
In general, remember that there are other choices apart from hands and tripods. For natural light photography I usually use my 180mm macro lens with a monopod, which has a shoulder attachment as well. If I'm well braced I can use this combination at 1/60 and sometimes at 1/30. This lets me set a decent aperture even if the light is less than ideal (which is usually the case in England :))

Alan

[DarthV]

Sometimes the larger lenses will help with hand shake because of their inertia... a 3lb lens might allow for less noticeable shake than a lighter lens..well until your arms/hands get tired, then the shakines really starts!