rangefinder realistic slowest hand held shutter speed?

rangefinder realistic slowest hand held shutter speed?

  • 1/60

    Votes: 28 7.2%

  • 1/30

    Votes: 115 29.5%

  • 1/15

    Votes: 134 34.4%

  • 1/8

    Votes: 80 20.5%

  • 1/4

    Votes: 22 5.6%

  • 1/2

    Votes: 8 2.1%

  • 1s

    Votes: 2 0.5%

  • > 1s ( are your subjects dead? )

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • Total voters
    390
  • Poll closed .
T

tlitody

Well-known
Local time
5:29 AM
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
1,768
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?
 
What theoretical lens are we using? A rule of thumb is 1/focal length, but that only applies to people actually trying to stand still. If nobody even knows you are taking a picture and motion blur is unacceptable, the faster the better. There is no one speed that will always work - you always need to balance desired depth of field, the ability to stop motion, and the amount of light you have to work with.
 
Anything below 1/30, unless you're photographing the dead, is movement blur territory.

In terms of camera movement ... provided you can find something to brace yourself against 1/8 will produce amazingly sharp results at times.
 
Attached a 1/8th example. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Depending on subject, desired print size and focal length, even 1/125 might be too slow.
 
roland, do you write down your settings for each shot? I wanted to pull a shot at 1/15 (or 1/8), but i realized i hadnt written down that info for each shots. Used to, been lazy. Just wondering. Thanks!

depending on the lens, i try and not drop below 1/15. I voted 1/30
 
ferider said:
Attached a 1/8th example. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Depending on subject, desired print size and focal length, even 1/125 might be too slow.
Click to expand...

I agree but as rule I think anything lower than 1/60 is going to show subject movement quite often. I just wondered what other people find is the slowest practical speed for themselves.
 
Generally I'll try to stay @ 1/30th or faster, but I find I can usually hit 1/10th if I'm well braced. Oddly enough 1/8th is noticeably more of a problem, so if I know I'm shooting some available darkness shots, I'm more likely to bring out the M3 w/ the old 1 2 5 10 25 etc speed steps on it over the M6.

-Brian
 
huntjump said:
roland, do you write down your settings for each shot? I wanted to pull a shot at 1/15 (or 1/8), but i realized i hadnt written down that info for each shots. Used to, been lazy. Just wondering. Thanks!

depending on the lens, i try and not drop below 1/15. I voted 1/30
Click to expand...

No, I don't. This one I remember, I had no choice (BW400CN with a 35/2) and was surprised that it was useable.

I often go by "as fast as possible", and bracket when I must.
 
Depends. My best was a night club picture of two friends at 1/2 f2 with a 50. My head was anchored to the cushion behind me, he stayed still as instructed, she didn't so well. It was a great shot. I'd never tried 1/2s before. I regularly try 1/4 and think nothing of 1/15. For posed pictures I always think of those shots from the 19th century with long exposures. It actually adds a little something to take it at 1/4s, I don't know why. Perhaps the whole drama of the instruction to keep perfectly still. Bill Pierce mentions the moments when a speaker at the podium will be suddenly still for a moment. I have taken lots of pictures from the front row of my association's annual scientific meeting, including with a 135 at 1/30s and even 1/15, resting on a rail. I've just ordered a monopod for this work. Here is a colleague of mine at 1/4s with the ZM C Sonnar 50. The camera (a hefty M5) rested on the front rail and this was one of 12 that was sharp. I only had 100 ASA film.


Dean's Lecture by Richard GM2, on Flickr

Don't know why that is not in line. BB code 640 width.....?
 
Last edited:
1/15, considering a 21mm. with a 35mm... 1/30.

I recently picked up a roll where I had taken a shot at 1/15, F2, iso 800 using a 35mm from a rastaman dancing to the reggae he was playing on his bike. his face was just slightly blurred, but enough for me to not consider it a useable shot. I'm pretty sure that 1/30 would have nailed it...
 
Last edited:
Like Phil said, it all depends on the focal length. With a 35mm lens, I can go down to 1/15 comfortably if the subject isn't moving.
 
I have and do shoot at 1/8s and 1/15s with 50mm and 28mm. While I do get pictures and most details survive reasonably well, sharpness and fine detail definitely go out the window at those speeds.
 
1/30 is my general rule.

on my m4 with soft release, i could try 1/8 where half will be blur

on my praktica mtl5b, 1/50 is the slowest

interestingly on my medium format rf645, i could get 1/8 shots with both elbows on the table.
 
Inversely proportional to 1/focal_length and directly proportional to product of age and alcohol intake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom