elmarit 180mm f2.8

[nikonosguy]

what is the absolute minimum handheld shutter speed for this lens?

add in the 2x teleconverter, what would be the new minimum handhaeld shutter speed?


got the lens for christmas and have it mounted on the r5...

this is the version 2, made in 1977

 

[presspass]

Typically, the minimum handheld speed for a lens is the equivalent of the focal length. In this case, 1/180th of a second. If you have steady hands and a motor on the camera, you might get away with 1/125. The same formula can be used by adding a converter - in this case, about 1/400th for the lens and converter. There are a lot of other factors, of course, including just how sharp you want the photograph and, as said, how steady your hands are.

 

[mfogiel]

I would prefer to use at least a monopod with anything longer than 100mm, no matter what shutter speed. It's a very nice lens.

20131116 by mfogiel, on Flickr

 

[nikonosguy]

cool -- i've got the monopod- -- just hoping the tripod ring is sturdy


my bag keeps getting heavier

 

[Godfrey]

what is the absolute minimum handheld shutter speed for this lens?
add in the 2x teleconverter, what would be the new minimum handhaeld shutter speed?
got the lens for christmas and have it mounted on the r5...
this is the version 2, made in 1977

It's a lovely big lump of a lens!

On the R5, standard rules apply. 1/200 (1/400 with 2x teleconverter) is the usual minimum hand-held convention, but take those numbers with a grain of salt. I usually use 1/500 min for hand-held shooting with this lens on the Leicaflex SL, and use a tripod most of the time.

Good luck with it, and happy shooting.

G

 

[nikonosguy]

It's a lovely big lump of a lens!

On the R5, standard rules apply. 1/200 (1/400 with 2x teleconverter) is the usual minimum hand-held convention, but take those numbers with a grain of salt. I usually use 1/500 min for hand-held shooting with this lens on the Leicaflex SL, and use a tripod most of the time.

Good luck with it, and happy shooting.

G

cool --- it makes me wanna go on safari --- or stand on the sidelines of an nfl game

 

[nikonosguy]

it feels like an absolute brick compared to my tamron adaptall 500mm mirror lens --- i guess it's because they don't cheat and use mirrors -- it's all good solid heavy glass and brass

 

[Richard G]

Sounds like a great present to get. I've used a 200 on Olympus OM. I would say the shutter speed should be as fast as possible. If f4 at 1/1000 is achievable I'd consider that, although that's wide open on my 200. For you stopping down one stop probably gives you near optimum sharpness and contrast. If you end up putting this on the new digital M I would definitely go for at least 1/500 and preferably 1/1000.

Having agreed with the party line, I would then say don't miss the shot, especially shooting film if you're not developing yourself which will leave you with 400 ISO as your maximum. I regularly shoot a 90 at 1/45s or even 1/15s on an RF body. I've even salvaged a great shot at 1/15s with a 135 resting on something solid. For years I never even thought to attempt anything at less than 1/125s with that lens.

As mentioned already, it all depends on the end purpose of the picture too. Eisenstaedt had to field a patronising comment from someone when he had a 50mm lens on a tripod to shoot at 1/60s. He told his interlocutor that indeed he too cold hand hold 1/60s but since he did not yet know the fate of the image, and it might end up enlarged to over ten feet tall on the side of a truck, it needed to be sharp.

 

[nikonosguy]

certainly not a night lens --- will be using it this weekend

it takes some getting used to

 

[icebear]

If you are using a digital body and want to scrutinize your shots at 100% view on a good monitor you should use 1/ 2x f i.e. 1/500 or with the converter 1/1000s. Other wise you are taking your chances, which is fine but not a proper approach to [technical] image quality.

 

[nikonosguy]

all film body --- the r5 gets dragged with me most everywhere.....

 

[Godfrey]

If you are using a digital body ...

Funny you should mention that. I have tested my Elmarit-R 180/2.8 on the Olympus E-M1 body hand-held. The Olympus has in-body image stabilization. I've found (to my astonishment) that I can get acceptably sharp exposures, consistently, down as low as 1/60 second.

The Olympus 5-axis IS system is certainly a lot better than I am at keeping the camera still! Of course, I would not plan on such extremely long exposure times for such a long lens, hand held. And the beastie is just a bit too heavy to hold for very long anyway ..!

G

 

[Richard G]

Funny you should mention that. I have tested my Elmarit-R 180/2.8 on the Olympus E-M1 body hand-held. The Olympus has in-body image stabilization. I've found (to my astonishment) that I can get acceptably sharp exposures, consistently, down as low as 1/60 second.

The Olympus 5-axis IS system is certainly a lot better than I am at keeping the camera still! Of course, I would not plan on such extremely long exposure times for such a long lens, hand held. And the beastie is just a bit too heavy to hold for very long anyway ..!

G

That is remarkable. I remember the first time I read about automatic stabilization of long lenses being used hand held at 1/30s. It seems unnatural. To get this with a legacy lens just shows what a marvellous era we are living in.