Sharpness Shooting

[Bill Pierce]

In this forum we’ve discussed image sharpness in terms of the processing of different kinds of raw files, but we’ve not discussed something equally important, preserving sharpness when you’re taking the pictures.

Way back in the film days, but not so far back that Kodachrome hadn’t jumped from A.S.A 10 to 25 (then to 64), a bunch of us shooting news quickly found out that sharpness was often the result of using the highest possible shutter speed. HIgh shutter speed was much more important than the optical performance of a lens until you reached those wide open apertures that on some lenses were synonymous with awful performance. (The other thing that worked was a tripod. I used a little Leica table top tripod a lot. I found that it worked well held against walls and a number of things that weren’t tables - like police barricades during night time riots.)

This “highest shutter speed possible” philosophy got verified in the digital age the minute you looked at a lot of images at 100%. So, for me, the best thing I can do when shooting to preserve image sharpness is a high shutter speed.

I’m sure that others have found other ways to preserve sharpness when they’re taking pictures - the way they hold the camera and release the shutter, a lens that seems exceptional, high magnification focusing - not everybody is a news photographer getting bounced around. I wonder what techniques work best for you?

 

[John Bragg]

I dont shoot digital, and I am not a tripod user (mostly), but I find controlled breathing and a careful release and follow through, like rifle shooting, helps immensely.

 

[jlphoto]

Bill,
Many years ago a writer in a photo magazine told of how he had assisted Eisenstaedt and was surprised to see that he used a tripod when the writer could have shot hand-held. Eisie said he had to be sure every shot would hold up to a double-truck layout. This covinced me to buy a Tiltall, my first piece of professional gear. That and a table-tripod were constant companions through my professional life. Now I find myself shooting more hand-held, but I seldom go out without my 3-legged backup.
Jim Lundell

 

[Richard G]

You wrote the book on this in my view: your chapter in the 1970s Leica Manual is a great resource and I reread it recently. One of the things you emphasised there was learning to anticipate the peak of the action. Some people jump around when they talk, but even they may pause for effect, or wait for applause to die down or something. I got a picture of colleague of mine at an evening lecture using every trick I knew as I only had 100 ASA film in the camera. I had the M5 resting on the front barrier of the lecture hall, and I was shooting mostly 1/2s and 1/4s with an f1.5 50. I used most of the roll and got one shot that I was happy with.

I now take a monopod to such talks, a small Gitzo that no-one notices when I enter the hall. I have a quick release plate attahced so I can put everything out of the way except when I am shooting. I took your lead and bought a Leitz table top tripod in 1977, with the small ballhead, and that has been invaluable. It has been everywhere with me and I have used it as a chest pod, on rocks for landscape, on walls, cars and even on low concrete ceilings.

Pressing the camera against a window with a plastic hood is a good stabilizer. I was shocked at just how sharp my newest lens and only ASPH lens is, the Leica 28 2.8, the first time I properly immobilized it.

I know everyone says my Rolleiflex or 35mm Ektar or whatever is better than digital, but I find the resolution with digital is astounding. And this early on led me to double my shutter speeds where possible. On the street with Tri-X I always tried to have 1/250s if I could, but now with the M9 I try to have 1/500s if possible.

My technique for shutter release is as good as I can make it, and I don't like 'softies', but soft mode for the shutter release on the M9 really does help. A bigger heavier camera helps I think: I was better with the M2 in its case than without, and I am better with the M5 than most things. I haven't tried a half case for the M9 and probably won't.

Finally, higher shutter speed means wider aperture, and for streeet and other candid stuff I am trying to improve my guesses at distance so I can have that faster speed, knowing that my shallower depth of field is going to contain my subject. I am not there yet.

 

[Eric T]

Couldn't agree more with Bill.
Three most important factors to me:
1. Shutter speed
2. Tripod
3. Image stabilization (either lens or body)
Preference depends on circumstances.

 

[froyd]

I dont shoot digital, and I am not a tripod user (mostly), but I find controlled breathing and a careful release and follow through, like rifle shooting, helps immensely.

Could you please exllain in more detail what you mean by follow through? I wonder if it's somethin similar to my habit to holding the shutter down for a breath after the shutter fires.

 

[Richard G]

Could you please exllain in more detail what you mean by follow through? I wonder if it's somethin similar to my habit to holding the shutter down for a breath after the shutter fires.

I think follow through is very important. This is why my M2 and the soft mode on the M9 work so well. The shutter must be squeezed to trip it, without the finger descending to the bottom of the available travel of the shutter button, a sudden stop likely interfering with stability of the camera. This is the problem with metered film Ms, especially the M6 in my experience: the shutter fires finally so low in the travel of the shutter button. The M2 is perfect in this regard.

 

[charjohncarter]

I shoot digital only for a couple of friends that ask me to do photos for the town I live. AND as I remember Kodachrome 10, I always, if hand held, use a highest possible shutter speed. Even if you use a tripod people move which make digital files at 100% look bad. I now use flash with digital at all times so I can boost the shutter speed and limit subject movement.

 

[Tom Rymour]

Shutter speed and tripod, yes. When travelling I used a clamp that went in the bag. It had attachments including a coarse threaded screw that would go into a tree. It replaced a homemade cast-iron carpenter's clamp with a tripod head brazed onto it, which failed in a way that could have made headlines.
In 1969 was on the observation deck of the Latin American Tower in Mexico City. tightening up the clamp for an exposure of the Alameda just after sunset. As I gave the clamp screw a final nip, the whole contraption fractured, and the Leica M, with one half of the clamp attached, dropped into my left hand. My right hand grabbed the other half off the railing. That night I counted my blessings, imagining what my M1 would have done to the head of a passer-by, 40-odd storeys below...

 

[jsrockit]

I have a slight tremor that gets exaggerated by caffiene, which I tend to like. I always try to use a fast shutter speed these days. High ISO digital cameras have made things easier on me. 🙂 Even if I go to 1/125th or 1/60th, I take care to breath correctly and be conscious of shake. I prefer to use 1/250th or more.

 

[redisburning]

mass helps.

richardson-lucy deconvolution routines help too.

 

[hausen]

I am mainly a MF shooter these days and as such always use a tripod. I find that habit has spread to my use of my M6 and RX-1. I have the Manfrotto table top tripod always in my bag but mainly use a larger 2 piece manfrotto. Also I am on a Michael Kenna trip at present and long exposure is always a tripod.

 

[froyd]

This might upset some folks, but I got many more blurred shots with the Zeiss Ikon at 1/15 than I get with the M4. Could be dozen other factors, including self-fulfilling prophecy, but there you have it.

 

[DougK]

My photos got a lot better when I started putting my camera on a tripod or some other kind of support. I also try to keep my shutter speed as high as possible when I have to go handheld.

 

[Rob-F]

I've been puzzling over the tradeoff between the greater inherent sharpness of slower films, vs. the advantage of higher shutter speeds afforded by faster films. It seems to me that a sharp fast film like Ilford Delta 400 at, say, 1/500 second, is better than 1/125 second with Delta 100 or T-Max 100. I haven't tested it scientifically, but I believe the reduced camera movement blur at the higher speed outweighs the greater resolution potential of the slower film. Has anyone experimented with this?

 

[davidbivins]

This might upset some folks, but I got many more blurred shots with the Zeiss Ikon at 1/15 than I get with the M4. Could be dozen other factors, including self-fulfilling prophecy, but there you have it.

I've only held a Zeiss Ikon in a store, but isn't it really light compared to the (brass) M4? I would imagine that's a big factor.

I usually shoot somewhere from 1000-3200 in the street in order to keep my shutter speed high and aperture small.

I've done things like brace the side of the camera body against a wall, press a lens hood against a window, and pull a short camera strap so that it's tight against the back of my neck. I always wanted to try something I saw online once: you get a bolt that fits your tripod hole, attach that to a length of wire, and on the other end to a large washer. You then step on the washer and pull up on the wire to stabilize the camera body (the length of wire is from the ground to eye level). Anyone else tried this?

 

[lukitas]

All the tricks are great but the best one is speed.
I did and will use tripods, walls and poles and even wires and I used to tension the strap of my (ex) hasselblad, but nothing beats high speeds from a handheld camera. A flash is intrusive, breaks the mood.
Higher speeds make the decisive moment shorter, more precise.
Not much to say against motion blur, but the light and the subject have to be perfect to make it work.
Photography is (mostly) about capturing something real, through a lens, so sharpness rules. 1/1000 @ f64 is my holy grail.

 

[thegman]

High shutter speeds or tripod for me. Despite only using film, in broad daylight, that still allows 1/500 at f/16 at 400 ASA.

 

[leicapixie]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135668

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135668

Many new cameras with digital imaging have anti-shake features.
I use mainly Point and Shoot for almost everything.I have Leica-M for film, but really do prefer those small folk. Two of those have anti-shake.I get sharp shots at slow speeds, that i would never have tried in the past.
I think if i were to add a DSLR it would be a Pentax, because of that feature.
I do still use my Leica table tripod. I still sometimes use the real tripod. I learn't long ago, a way to release a shutter and get some good portraits with minimal light and a 90mm.
My sharpest M is the M2! Sharpest SLR a Nikon F3.
I guess one better calibrated and good shutter release, the F3, the full heavy body.

 

[Gareth Rees]

High shutter speed works for me, unless using a tripod.