Tripod?

zaroba · May 29, 2019

I got a Platinum Plus 5800d tripod years ago from a flea market figuring I would use it, but so far I haven't used it once. I used to take it with me to parks/gardens/etc but after a few months of not using it I stopped bringing it and it's sat in my closet ever since. The few times I could have used it I found that it was far easier and faster to just set the camera on a ledge/railing, or even kneel down and have it on my knee for extra stability.

I do often see people using them to take pics of flowers when I go to the local botanical garden, but I am curious as to what the benefit is. Just people using them who don't have steady hands for snapping pics of stationary, well lit flowers? Or is there some whole other aspect I have been missing out on in my numerous trips there?

Soocom1 · May 29, 2019

The human body when holding anything has micro twitching taking place. This is a result of the electro-chemical actions of the human body.
For extremely sharp images a tripod holds the camera in near absolute non-movement.
At short distances with fast shutter speeds and compensating mechanics like IS in the Canon, the images will be extremely sharp.
but at longer distances the blur becomes more noticeable and the human body simply is not capable of not moving.
So when held and supported by solid objects the camera records an image with extreme sharpness (or lack of movement). A tripod is helpful for holding a camera steady when no other object or ability exists to do so, and especially for larger heavier cameras where it would be fatiguing or impossible to hold by hand.

ronlane · May 29, 2019

What Soocom1 said.

Typically if you are shooting shutter speeds of 1/focal length (example: 50mm at 1/50) then you should be fine without a tripod. Once you get slower than that there is possibility of camera shake and getting out of focus images.

RVT1K · May 29, 2019

I'll use my tripod if I know I'm going to be parked somewhere. Last weekend I put a chair and my tripod by my hummingbird feeder and waited. Since I was using my D3 and Tamron 300mm f/2.8, hand holding is very, very difficult due to the weight.

I find my monopod far easier to take around with me. I found it almost indispensable when I was shooting MotoGP at Indy a few years ago. The monopod was able to support the weight (Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 this time) and allow me to track the moving bikes better.

Designer · May 29, 2019

zaroba said:
.. I am curious as to what the benefit is. Just people using them who don't have steady hands for snapping pics of stationary, well lit flowers? Or is there some whole other aspect I have been missing out on in my numerous trips there?

As usual, "it depends".

It depends on the situation. Heavy camera, heavy lens, close focusing, long(ish) shutter opening, slow film, low light, needing perfect sharpness, etc.

If every shot you make is hand-holdable, and you have fairly steady hands, then you probably don't need to use your tripod. Don't toss it out just yet, as someday you might decide to use it for some particular shot.

Derrel · May 29, 2019

A tripod typically causes the photographer to slow down quite a bit, and in many cases it allows you to snap a shot and then review the photo on the LCD, and then to make adjustments. A tripod also promotes consistency of framing from shot to shot, and allows you to do things like focus stacking.

A tripod can be used for camera support, for slowing down the shooting process,or as an aid to better composition, and in some social photography situations, the use of a tripod adds gravitas.

So, as you can see, a tripod has many uses.

Soocom1 · May 29, 2019

In metal and wood working, the need for vibration isolation is critical especially in high presicion work.
A camera regardless of size or type will pick up even minute vibrations.
Earth vibrations are far to low frequency for us to detect but can be caught with a camera.

A sturdy and stout tripod (heavy and stiff) will absorb much of that vibration.
High frequency vibration not so much.
But it will give extremely sharp images even with a goodly wind going on.

So even a Canaon Sureshot and even an iPhone will benifit.

dunfly · May 29, 2019

Everyone should have a tripod and know how to use it. That being said, I rarely use one because I don't like hauling it around. I do use it, however, if I am taking a bracketed series for HDR or for a series to be stitched for a panorama. I will also use it if I want a very sharp landscape shot or a night shot.

Derrel · May 29, 2019

There are certain types of photos that almost require a tripod!

TCampbell · May 29, 2019

zaroba said:
I do often see people using them to take pics of flowers when I go to the local botanical garden, but I am curious as to what the benefit is. Just people using them who don't have steady hands for snapping pics of stationary, well lit flowers? Or is there some whole other aspect I have been missing out on in my numerous trips there?

There may be some aspects you are missing out on. I'm guessing those photographers you see may be using a higher f-stop which requires a longer exposure duration (too long for a hand-held shot).

Assuming the botanical garden example... camera is probably reasonably close to the bloom. Assuming hand-held photography, you need a shutter speed fast enough for the hand held shot. That may not be a problem depending on the lighting ... but will probably require a low f-stop. This will produce a very narrow focal ratio and you wont get much of a single bloom in focus this way.

Here's one at ISO 100, f/2.8 and it's a 1/25th sec exposure (I did use a tripod). It was on an image-stabilized lens so I maybe the tripod wasn't necessary but ... look at the shallow DoF. I didn't capture adequate DoF to get the whole bloom.

So here's another.

This time I altered the f-stop to f/11 ... that fixes the DoF problem but now the shutter speed is 6 seconds long! There isn't a living-breathing person on the planet that can hand-hold a camera for 6 seconds. For this... you NEED a tripod (and a photographer who is smart enough to get the hose-reel out of the shot... d'oh!).

The camera needs to be fairly low for this shot. But as the camera is on a tripod, I don't need to worry about back-strain and a visit to the chiropractor.

But there is one more thing. Turns out I do own a ring-flash. So here's a shot from a botanical garden (orchid competition) using the ring flash.

This is ISO 100 and I am using f/11 again... but this time the shutter speed is 1/200th sec BECAUSE there's a ring flash providing the light (and notice the extremely dark background ... there was actually plenty of light in the room but the light fall-off from the ring flash means that at 1/200th sec you don't get much of the ambient room light in the shot.

But ... at 1/200th sec. there's no tripod needed.

There are other techniques.

Suppose you've got a field of sunflowers and the wind is blowing. You want a faster shutter speed but if you open the aperture to allow more light (for a faster shutter), the depth of field narrows and you can't get the the entire field in sharp focus. So you grab a tilt-shift lens so you can dial it down to f/4 ... and while that fixes the shutter speed, you've still got the narrow DoF. But with a tilt-shift lens, you can tilt the plane of focus to match the blooms on the entire field of flowers simultaneously while *still* using a low f-stop *and* a high shutter speed. (tilt-shift lenses are completely manual, have a high learning-curve, and aren't cheap ... but they are another way to get a broad depth of field (or at least the change the plane of the DoF so everything you care about is inside the DoF).

Ring-flashes are more expensive than typical flashes and tilt-shift lenses are expensive. A less-expensive way to get the broad DoF is to use a tripod.