rangefinder realistic slowest hand held shutter speed?

[filmfan]

Some of my best photos are below 1/30. Who wants perfect sharpness all the time? Yawn...

 

[Tom Diaz]

I really don't think anything under 1/15 is going to look good enlarged.

TD

 

[koven]

1/13th is the slowest shutter speed i can comfortably hold the camera at


you had to have been there by MrEllis, on Flickr


bike3333 by MrEllis, on Flickr

 

[soelin]

1/15 on a 80mm f/3.5 medium format;
1/30 on a 50mm f/2 35mm format.

 

[user237428934]

With 1/30 good quality is repeatable. Anything below is just luck.

 

[FalseDigital]

Lately I've been able to get some sharp photos at 1/4 while using my CV 15mm on my Bessa-R. Wide angle lenses definitely make it easier.

 

[Steinberg2010]

Yes, absolutely. The main thing is not to jerk the trigger/shutter release, but to squeeze it until it "breaks"(like a glass rod). Jerking the trigger is called a "flinch", and will throw the shot off, usually low and to the left.
Next time the Winter Olympics are on watch the biathlon. The skiers are breathing hard and have to time their shots to their breaths.

I used to shoot target rifles competitively and I have to admit I take the same approach with long shutter speeds - timing the shots to my breathing and then squeezing gently so as not to push the camera off to one side as the shutter fires...

~S

 

[joeswe]

I have been an SLR shooter for many years and haven only recently been converted to rangefinders. In the SLR days I would usually go after "limit is 1/60th, better is 1/125th for a standard lens" rule of thumb. When I was in a pinch and had to use slower speeds, it would usually show in the pictures.
The other day, I was visiting a museum ship in Hamburg (the Cap San Diego, an beautiful cargo ship from the early 1960s and a must see when you visit Hamburg) and found some beautiful motifs in the depths of the engine room. The M3 was loaded with Delta 400 and I shot the Summicron 50 wide open, but lighting was so dim that for the first time I had to use shutter times below 1/50th with the M3. The shots below were both made with 1/10th at f2. Of course I took my time, relaxed as much as possible, but I must confess that I am not the most steadiest shooter and I was not very confident the shots would be okay... I was *very* suprised to find out that all of the pictures turned out pleasantly sharp and usable. I thought, wow, this is rangefinder territory!
On the other hand, when maximum sharpness is absolutely critical, I would second A. Adams' observations that have been quoted here. The faster, the better.

 

[39per1]

1/15s with 50mm; 1/4s with CV 15 (half of the pics are sharp enough.....).

 

[elmer3.5]

Contax IIa the slowest!!!

Contax IIa the slowest!!!

Hi, dpends on what camera you´re using.

The iii´f withstands up to 1/10 or 1/8 the M series perhaps not that slower but 1/15, the hexar a little faster, just as the g1, g2 and ZI.
But the slowest camera to my surprise is the contax IIa i would dare shot down to 1/5th, it´s just stunnig how solid and stable it is!!!
Don´t know why i don´t use it that much!!!

 

[ramosa]

Gotta include F-stop and focal length for such a consideration.

 

[zauhar]

Gotta post my ~4sec ("one-one thousand...") shot taken during hurricane Irene at around midnight with the power out. I was braced against the low wall in front of my house.

 

[user237428934]

Gotta include F-stop and focal length for such a consideration.

I understand focal length as an important parameter. But f-stop?

 

[jawarden]

With 1/30 good quality is repeatable. Anything below is just luck.

My experience is similar. With a 35mm lens I expect good results at 1/30, and I'm pleasantly surprised if I get something good at 1/15 or 1/8. I won't go past 1/8.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

This thread is interesting, but could be deleted and made again:

Depending on the subject, the lens used, and where we can lean on or not, it goes from 1/2 to 1/125...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[rogerzilla]

I can do 1/30 with a 50mm lens and 1/15 with a 21mm lens without any noticeable blur, i.e. small details with text are still perfectly readable and the grain is the limiting factor. However, 1/30 with a 90mm lens only got me about 1 in 4 sharp shots, even with a monopod.

 

[Livesteamer]

Long ago in my college days, if I had a glass of wine in me I was good down to a 1/4 second with my old Nikon S. Now much older I try to stay at 125 or above. If I've used the chainsaw that day just forget about photography. Joe

 

[Gary Briggs]

Sometimes I love the blur of their movement, though if I try to much, most just look stupid, sometimes the accidental ones are the best.

 

[fotomeow]

my choice was 1/15, and that would be a generous average, since I weighed my answer quite a bit in response to the keyword "realistic" in the OPs question. It was either that or 1/30th.

 

[PMCC]

If your shots are never blurry, you aren't trying hard enough.