Heavy versus light camera for portraits in low light.

[John Bragg]

So, what is your preference for hand held portraiture in low light ? Does a heavy camera help with stability and hence help with shooting in low light ? I believe that there are some benefits with shooting a weightier SLR over a plastic fantastic lightweight. Obviously too heavy can have a penalty with fatigued muscles but there surely is a correlation between an adequately weighted camera and stability and vibration damping.

 

[sevo]

The rule is valid when using the same camera, with weight-increasing appendices - you get an two extra stops out of a F3 when using it with the motor, powered off, or one stop extra by using the eight- rather than four-battery holder on the F4. But it is not true across different cameras - the ratio between static and moving mass and the timing of moving components do not depend on total weight.

Most heavy cameras also have increased moving mass - and the balance may shift towards the latter, making them less suitable for long handheld exposures. There have been ultra heavy cameras with horrible damping (e.g. the Pentax 6x7) and light cameras with excellent damping (e.g. Pentax MX), even from the same maker. And then there is the whole matter of timing (for example, the Mamiya RB67 kicked like a mule, but only after its shutter closed).

And on top of that there are manual shake issues - whose response to weight will also depend on your physical condition (and underlying diseases)...

 

[John Bragg]

The rule is valid when using the same camera, with weight-increasing appendices - you get an two extra stops out of a F3 when using it with the motor, powered off, or one stop extra by using the eight- rather than four-battery holder on the F4. But it is not true across different cameras - the ratio between static and moving mass and the timing of moving components do not depend on total weight.

Most heavy cameras also have increased moving mass - and the balance may shift towards the latter, making them less suitable for long handheld exposures. There have been ultra heavy cameras with horrible damping (e.g. the Pentax 6x7) and light cameras with excellent damping (e.g. Pentax MX), even from the same maker. And then there is the whole matter of timing (for example, the Mamiya RB67 kicked like a mule, but only after its shutter closed).

And on top of that there are manual shake issues - whose response to weight will also depend on your physical condition (and underlying diseases)...

Thanks for the response Sevo. I am at the moment favoring my Nikon F5 for the reasons stated. Very good damping and low vibration all round.

 

[oftheherd]

The rule is valid when using the same camera, with weight-increasing appendices - you get an two extra stops out of a F3 when using it with the motor, powered off, or one stop extra by using the eight- rather than four-battery holder on the F4. But it is not true across different cameras - the ratio between static and moving mass and the timing of moving components do not depend on total weight.

Most heavy cameras also have increased moving mass - and the balance may shift towards the latter, making them less suitable for long handheld exposures. There have been ultra heavy cameras with horrible damping (e.g. the Pentax 6x7) and light cameras with excellent damping (e.g. Pentax MX), even from the same maker. And then there is the whole matter of timing (for example, the Mamiya RB67 kicked like a mule, but only after its shutter closed).

And on top of that there are manual shake issues - whose response to weight will also depend on your physical condition (and underlying diseases)...

I think that you are correct, and it is too often overlooked. Carrying a camera often and looking through the viewfinder, even when no photo is taken, is one way to build up muscles. Holding weights next to your eyes is another I would guess, but getting used to the 'feel' of the camera is more important I think.

That said, when I used to do a fair amount of it, most of my low light photography was done with a Yashica TL Super, or a Fujica ST 901. Both heavy for their size.

 

[Calzone]

Sniper rifles are generally heavy.

Balance and ergonomics matter a lot.

I own a F3P and I use it with a Noct-Nikkor for the VF'er with MD-4, but the F5 I reserve for use with a 28/1.4 AF-D. The F5 has a smoother shutter for sure.

Cal

 

[unixrevolution]

I prefer to shoot my LX in low light with the winder and grip. The winder both adds damping mass, and makes the shutter button MUCH lighter.

The grip can't be understated either. Having a firm grip on your camera means you aren't overstressing your muscles and inducing shake.

 

[Bill Clark]

Why not use a tripod?

Or a monopod. I have a bean bag that attaches to the camera that can be used to lean on something, a pole, rail, chair, ladder........

How to make a bean bag:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljGfch_cxJU

Also you can purchase one at B & H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Counter-Chest-Strap-Pods/ci/10834/N/4075788766

 

[John Bragg]

Why not use a tripod?

Or a monopod. I have a bean bag that attaches to the camera that can be used to lean on something, a pole, rail, chair, ladder........

How to make a bean bag:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljGfch_cxJU

Also you can purchase one at B & H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Counter-Chest-Strap-Pods/ci/10834/N/4075788766

Hi Bill, that is somewhat off topic, but since you mention impromptu supports, how about a string tripod ?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I don't like big rigs and here is no needs for it at all. Jane Bown did a lot of low light, hand held portraits with OM1 and one tele lens at f2.8.
On my level of amateur nothing will do better than flash, which doesn't need to be huge either. Or in-lens image stabilization which comes with Canon EOS system. Film or digital.

 

[BillBingham2]

Hi Bill, that is somewhat off topic, but since you mention impromptu supports, how about a string tripod ?

I was wondering about using a thin camera strap much like many used to use a sling on a rifle?

I've used mini-pods (Minolta and Leica) with good results but they feel limiting in how you have stand/move to me.

B2 (;->

 

[Calzone]

I was wondering about using a thin camera strap much like many used to use a sling on a rifle?

I've used mini-pods (Minolta and Leica) with good results but they feel limiting in how you have stand/move to me.

B2 (;->

Bill,

Good point about the strap. I have my neck strap set rather short, and I can sling it under my elbow and draw the strap taunt to stabilize my camera.

Also there is the joke: want to rapidly loose 15 pounds? Chop off your head. I find that pressing the camera against my head forcefully can unify the mass of the camera with the mass of my head.

Leaning on doorways, croutching on one knee and putting my elbow on the other knee as a tripod, or sitting on in a chair or ground all add stability.

Cal

 

[Bill Clark]

Oh, I see you only wanted to hear about hand held. Guess I missed that. Sorry.

But I use a tripod to make portraits; however, I suggested another way, one that I use. I find a tripod is absolutely necessay when the client wants a large print, having sold a few 30/40 which, in my opinion, would have quality issues using a hand held camera.

Try both ways, then enlarge the file in Photoshop and look at the difference. Or did I miss you using a film camera?

Why not use a tripod? Does it make a difference, the weight of a camera, if a tripod is used?

 

[BillBingham2]

....Also there is the joke: want to rapidly loose 15 pounds? Chop off your head.....

When I talk about loosing weight my wife usually adds something about it being 15 UGLY pounds!!:bang:

..Leaning on doorways, croutching on one knee and putting my elbow on the other knee as a tripod, or sitting on in a chair or ground all add stability.....

I always carried a handkerchief in my bag and would use it for making a pad that fills the crevices, nooks and crannies of the tree or stone wall making it steadier and leaves less marks on the camera. I also allows me to use the left side of the camera the same way I would the bottom.

B2 (;->

 

[BLKRCAT]

M5, Nokton F1.1. Hefty, fast, sharp. Perfect.

 

[kxl]

I'd rather have in-body image stabilization (IBIS) or lens stabilization

plus high ISO plus fast lens.

 

[Godfrey]

I find that there has to be a truly substantial difference in weight between two specific cameras to cast any useful judgment about which of those two specific cameras works better for low light portraiture. Other factors also affect hand-holdability, such as the weight of the lens you're using, the specific shape of the body and where the controls are located, how well you modulate your breathing, etc etc.

Making overly general judgements is very little help for those attempting to figure out what camera to use.

G

 

[Huss]

I can hand hold my F2 at lower speeds better than my FM2n or FE2. The Nikon F6 is the boss in that respect, not only heavy but with an incredibly well damped shutter and mirror mechanism.

But none can compare to my Leica M7 (yeah yeah I know not an SLR..)

 

[silverbullet]

low light = open aperture and razorsharp DOF. Just one eye, no ears?
The smaller the sensor the better until to much noise will occur compare to larger sensors.
For me an Olympus with 5-axis is the best camera to shoot portraits in dim lights. Or larger sensor and wide angle lens, in FF around 28mm is a good compromise which requires a bit of training and self confidence in front of unknown people (in my case).

Cheers
Bernd