Shutter speed and f/stop ratio..

[Gavjenks]

No you don't need any mount, because it isn't standing ON anything. It just floats in heliosynchronous orbit.
And you would probably simply construct it in the first place already pointing at its subject, so you don't need to turn it.

 

[cynicaster]

I think it's rather silly to quibble over the correct statement of the 1/whatever formula, because its use--in ANY form--guarantees nothing, good or bad.

For sharp photos just determine what is the fastest shutter you can get away with. Then, if in doubt about whether you may need to bump your ISO to get more speed, mentally check it against the 1/whatever rule of your choice and make a call. Apply good/steady hand holding technique and fire away.

 

[Gavjenks]

Well yeah if you have time to check and a reason to, then check. The point of a rule of thumb is if you have a brief opportunity and need to choose NOW, not choose after taking 10 test shots and hemming and hawing over the relative % keepers in different shutter speeds using your tiny LCD screen, etc. So it does sort of matter. You'll either miss the brief opportunity or nail it, depending on if your rule is accurate or not.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Overread said it, just a guideline. Go out and try different shutter speeds and figure out what works for you. I don't like shooting slower than 1/125 or 1/100, will go to 1/60 or so if it's low light and I need to use a slower speed. And I make sure I take time to get braced and balanced if I'm going to use a slower speed.

But I prefer a faster rather than slower speed to make sure I'm getting sharp enough images. And I can use a slower speed with a shorter lens much easier than trying it with a longer lens that I'd have to give more support.

 

[JacaRanda]

I should probably factor in how fast my finger can actually trigger the shutter button. You know, like having your trigger finger on the ps3 or xbox controller in ready position as opposed to floating in the air.

Can we get a page or two more out of that scenario?

 

[Overread17 5]

I should probably factor in how fast my finger can actually trigger the shutter button. You know, like having your trigger finger on the ps3 or xbox controller in ready position as opposed to floating in the air.

Can we get a page or two more out of that scenario?

Actually you'd be surprised how many wobbly photos are caused by the shutter button. You don't tend to notice it as much when shooing normally ,but when one shoots macro (esp high magnification macro) you fast find that you have to learn to squeeze without moving your hand as you do so. You still have to be quick, but its a gentle push not a hard one.

Interestingly that was one big difference between my Rebel camera and my 7D. The rebel had a smooth and soft half press, and then you felt a small bump before a full press. This makes its easier to half-press for focusing/metering and not accidentally activating the shutter; but it means that when you press it you get a firm click that cause more shake asa result of your hand motions. The 7D on the other hand is a very gentle and soft squeeze all the way which whilst feeling odd at first (and a touch easy to press all the way too soon) does mean that you can squeeze gently

 

[JacaRanda]

No doubt. It would be nice (at least on my 60d) if I could slide the shutter button just a tad to the left whereas my finger could lie flat across the area up to the button instead of curved.

Adjustable shutter button location hmmmmmm??????? Just 1/2 centimeter in either direction.

 

[Overread17 5]

Camera design is very much inhibited by convention and accessories. Film cameras had some physical requirements that defined a good portion of their resulting shape. Digital cameras are fast approaching a point where many of the conventions aren't or won't be needed. However the whole market surrounding and supporting them (eg tripods - tripod heads - etc.) is geared to one generalist overall design. This inhibits and discourages camera designers from trying for more ergonomic designs because chances are they'd each try something different - suddenly if you're out of the common market design its a problem (esp if they all went differnt random directions).

You can see this with Sony and their own hotshoe design locking them out of a fair few 3rd party accessories.

 

[JacaRanda]

Maybe Gav will work on it after that other thing he is making.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[bratkinson]

Well, now that the newbies have been totally confused by the mental gymnastics put forth in this thread (me too, and I'm a geezer!), I try to keep the KISS rule (Keep It Simple, Stupid). So 1/focal length for minimum shutter speed to stop camera shake is a good starting point.

But, as mentioned above, with the ability to blow up our images 100x and pixel peep rather than be satisfied with a 3x5 print from film, the 1/2 x focal length is probably safer. Thank you, Derrel, for that heads up. I've also noticed that the more grey hair I get, my hands are a bit less steady, and, I can even see it happening when I click the shutter the camera moves a bit as well. The slightly blurred images I've been getting prove it. IS (VR to the Nikon folks) helps keep it closer to 1/FL, but I'm down to only 1 of 4 lenses with IS, so I'll start using the 1/2 x FL instead.

 

[pondball]

I think you mean the 1/ over shutter speed idea, meaning if the lens focal length is 50mm, the shutter speed needs to be at least 1/50 second; with a 200mm telephoto, the shutter speed needs to be at least 1/200 second or faster. In today's digital age, many people feel that when using a high-resolution camera, like say a 24- to 36-megapixel camera, that the speed needs to be DOUBLED, so with a 50mm lens 1/100 second, with a 200mm lens 1/400 second. I myself feel that the double the length rule is a solid practice to follow.

This one made sense to me! Very plain and simple explanation. Thanks Derrel!