rangefinder realistic slowest hand held shutter speed?

[randolph45]

1/30*

1/30*

*with coffee if I'm lucky

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

I can go down to 1/15 considering I photograph a still object.

 

[250swb]

As the question is about photographing people who are moving (I suppose fidgetting) I would say the slowest speed should be 1/125th. And the longer the shutter is open the more chance you have of them blinking.

Steve

 

[Damaso]

I've shot as low as a 1/4 second but my most consistent slow results are around an 1/8.

This was shot at an 1/8 on an M8 with a summarit 90mm

https://picasaweb.google.com/damasoreyes/CubaArtistic2010#5562117814425369874

a little soft but that's what I was going for...

 

[Schlapp]

I regularly shoot at 1 sec hand-held. But then i do love movement!

 

[haempe]

I remember, my old Mentor in the 80s said to me, all speeds longer than 1/250 do not freeze a moving human object, what create the need of thinking before release the shutter, to catch a moment of stillness... 🙂

 

[FalseDigital]

I think it really depends on the person. Some people have more steady hands than others.
If the subject is still, my personal limit is 1/8

Here's an example shot handheld (nothing to prop against) w/ 50mm Jupiter-8 at f/2 on Bessa-R (Fuji Reala film)

 

[FalseDigital]

On a random note; I wonder if how steady we can hold a camera has any relation to how accurate we'd be shooting a rifle. 😛

 

[damien.murphy]

Also dependent on focal length, with wider focal lengths being more forgiving with blur not being as noticeable. Realistically though for people, unless movement is part of the image you're trying to capture, 1/30 is about as low as I will go when shooting people, although have gone to 1/15 at times, with need dictating.

Re: general usage, I find with a 50mm lens, I can easily handhold at 1/60. 1/30 is fine too, but I'm a little more conscious of my handholding technique. 1/15 also fine, but definitely like to give myself every advantage at this point, and 1/8 can be hit and miss, unless I'm very focussed, and even then, will usually take a second shot just to give myself a better chance of an acceptably sharp image.

In any case, being able to get a handheld image at 1/8th of a second is a very nice boon, and definitely not something I could have gotten from my dslr's, where I normally bottom out at 1/30th of a second. With stabilised lenses that changes though, and for static subjects I can easily get sharp results at 1/15, and mostly 1/8 also, with my Nikon 16-85VR which in terms of field of view is a 24- 135mm equivalent.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Anything below 1/30, unless you're photographing the dead, is movement blur territory.

Really? I've shot photos of people with a 35mm at 1/4 sec. successfully. I must have the Sixth Sense 😉 Shame on Leica!

 

[jsrockit]

I generally try to stay above 1/125th... if it's too dark for that, I'll use a high ISO camera. I have very shaky hands and while I can handhold at times at 1/10th or so, I'd rather not because it just isn't consistent. However, if you have no other choice...you may as well try.

Seems to me this has turned into a handheld machismo thread... 😉

 

[jljohn]

Another factor is your purpose with the image. If you are shooting dimly lit bar interiors to show on the web, 1/8 can be just fine (if all the people are pretty still). However, if you are out and about and shooting landscape details (flowers growing in the deep shade of some trees or something), and you plan on printing fine prints at 11x14 or 16x20, then 1/60 (maybe 1/30) is probably about all the faster you could go without loosing visible sharpness. I use a 50mm just about exclusively, and my practice for stationary or slow moving objects is to consider 1/30 my slowest option that I can count on. That said, I regularly shoot at 1/15 and 1/8 and get good results--it's just not guaranteed.

 

[myM8yogi]

With a 35/1.2 I can shoot down to 1/15 without a problem. If there is likely to be unwanted subject movement, I prefer to shoot at 1/60th.

But I answered 1/8th sec because I can regularly shoot this with a 21mm.

I've posted it before, but here is a shot with a 50mm f/1.5 Jupiter 3 at minimum (modified) focus distance and ISO 2500. I think it was at 1/15th sec, which is not bad for a 50mm. (No subject movement though ;O)

 

[Fotohuis]

With my M7 I can go till 1/15S. If you have a completely non moving object 1/8S. I am talking then for the 28mm lens. For the 50mm 1/15S unless I have some auxillary supporting objects, a wall, a car then around 1/4S but then the factor luck is going to play a role too.

 

[dogberryjr]

I like to think it's around 1/15, but my photos tell a different story.

 

[rudolf]

I always wanted to go under 1/30, but with no luck. On 21mm and 1/15 I still have a problem with steadiness:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/roderyk/5851862921/in/photostream

Yes, I know, shame on me.

But anyway, I don't drink coffee, so it has to be genetic 😉

 

[johannielscom]

How many times have I heard people saying they can hold a camera steady at 1/8th or even slower shutter speeds. That;s all very well if the subject is static but when photographing people they don't stand dead still. So what in your opinion is a realistic slowest speed for photographing people who might move if only a little?

1/60th. When wanting to rule out any movement that is.

Some people just plain stink when it comes to standing still! 😛

 

[bobkonos]

I am fine at 1/8. Elbows tucked in, knees slightly bent, fire shutter between breaths.

 

[NickTrop]

I didn't answer this one since a focal length wasn't specified.

 

[mrb]

There's a reciprocity rule of thumb that's applicable here. If you know 1/125 will be good, then it might take two shots at 1/60 to freeze motion, or four shots at 1/30, etc. This works for me...most of the time.