| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/05/2011 11:41:16 PM · #1 |
So,  bspurgeon commented in this thread that he'd be interested to see some of my hand held long exposures, which got me wondering just how steady I am compared to others - I'd like to think I'm really good, but I'm betting someone else is better!
The main purpose of this thread is to spur a bit of friendly competition, and to explore the subject, so please do weight in and play along if you feel like it Keep in mind that this is one of those places where equipment does make a huge difference, my 15-85mm IS rocks at this task, but I wouldn't DARE try this with my 28-135mm IS or my 100-400mm L IS...
So, to start things off right, here are a few that I took tonight at Ben's request, exposures are listed to the right, in all cases it was hand held, unsupported except for the pool picture where I was leaning my body against a fence but still holding the camera in my hands.
 - 2 seconds
 - 1.6 seconds
 - 1.6 seconds
 - 2 seconds
 - 0.8 seconds
I find that the number of blurry shots increases in a non-linear fashion relative to exposure time.
At .5 second basically every shot is useable, and about every third shot is crisp.
At 1 second I get a useable shot every two or three, and about 10 percent are crisp.
At 2 seconds I get a useable shot every 8-10 photos, and a truly crisp shot about every 20-30 shots.
|
|
|
|
07/05/2011 11:58:13 PM · #2 |
The other thing that makes a difference is how wide-angle the shot is; 15mm is a LOT more forgiving than 85mm, using that lens for an example. It's a function of how many arc-seconds the camera wobbles through and what percentage of the total view that represents.
R. |
|
|
|
07/05/2011 11:59:00 PM · #3 |
Can you share some techniques with us, oh rock-solid one?
|
|
|
|
07/06/2011 12:04:02 AM · #4 |
Not bad!
How about 20 seconds? ;)
ETA: I believe your goal is more sharp than blurry, yeah? For this I use the shoulder strap, fully extended to help keep the camera somewhat steady at least for several seconds to get the subject mostly in focus (relative to the rest of the image).
Message edited by author 2011-07-06 00:09:21. |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 12:12:02 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Can you share some techniques with us, oh rock-solid one? |
Technique 1: Throw money at your problems.
Technique 2: Use your strap as a brace by putting pressure against it to steady the camera (I do this by hanging the camera over my right shoulder like a purse, then bringing it to eye level and wrapping the strap around the body to tighten it...)
Technique 3: Lean against something
Beyond that? I think tripods are best.. :) lol... Really I think most of the reason I do this is just to push the limits..
Of course, the difference between Ben and I is that he's loving the blur, while I'm wanting a mixture of sharp and blur... Well, that and the fact that he has a ND filter (10 stop at that!)... Frankly I think that's probably my next purchase, shooting at f/22 just causes too many issues (diffraction and the need to keep a super clean sensor)..
Although, I do have a few shots in the pipeline that I'll either enter or share in a while, VERY blurry wonderful messes of color and light.. :) Of course, they're all more like .6 seconds or less, I just move the camera with intent for those...
Message edited by author 2011-07-06 00:12:59. |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 12:13:53 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The other thing that makes a difference is how wide-angle the shot is; 15mm is a LOT more forgiving than 85mm, using that lens for an example. It's a function of how many arc-seconds the camera wobbles through and what percentage of the total view that represents.
R. |
OH soo true... Another reason why my 15-85 is preferred for this task... :) |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 09:39:33 AM · #7 |
Another post in agreement with Robert. I've gotten some crisp images hand-held at > 0.25 second with the 15mm fisheye, but if I tried that at 100mm, I'd be standing there trying still ;-)
To expand on this thought, the 1/FL rule is the mathematical embodiment of this. It states that the lowest practical shutter speed is inversely proportional to focal length. It's intended for rectilinear lenses, and falls apart (becomes too liberal) at very small focal lengths. For fisheye lenses, it's relatively conservative. In fact, if you can hand-hold at the 1/FL rule (most people can, at least under good conditions) you should be able to get at least a decent percentage of crisp shots from the 15mm fish at 1/6 second or so!
Bottom line, you can gauge your steadiness by how many stops better (or worse, LOL) than the 1/FL rule you are. Just don't pixel peep too much!
Almost a decade ago now, I walked around Berlin at night with a co-worker, and all I was carrying was my trusty Nikon 995. Fast, it is not, and a good performer at high ISO, it certainly is not (I still have it). I got a number of very good shots by bracing the camera against solid objects. I've done this with an SLR as well, getting multi-second shots at moderate focal lengths (24 to 50mm range) with no visible shake.
Edit for typo
Message edited by author 2011-07-06 09:41:26. |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 09:49:53 AM · #8 |
I dunno... probably about 1 second at less than 20mm with VR on.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2011 11:07:26 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Technique 2: Use your strap as a brace by putting pressure against it to steady the camera (I do this by hanging the camera over my right shoulder like a purse, then bringing it to eye level and wrapping the strap around the body to tighten it...) |
Could you please elaborate on that technique? I'm not sure to understand, and I would like to try that.
Thanks |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 02:04:01 PM · #10 |
For this one I strapped my mini-tripod to a cane, which I then leaned against my shoulder as I knelt on the ground. I was taking a lot of shots, and moving the camera around and making adjustments, so I'd consider this "practically" handheld.
 |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 02:26:58 PM · #11 |
| A very easy way to get some stability handheld is to tie a string at one end to your camera's quick release plate and at the other end to a large washer (50 cents at home depot). Experiment with the length of the string. Step on the washer and pull the string taut as you raise the camera to your eye. Keep pulling against the string as you take your picture. This tension will provide some stability. |
|
|
|
07/06/2011 02:31:59 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
A very easy way to get some stability handheld is to tie a string at one end to your camera's quick release plate and at the other end to a large washer (50 cents at home depot). Experiment with the length of the string. Step on the washer and pull the string taut as you raise the camera to your eye. Keep pulling against the string as you take your picture. This tension will provide some stability. |
I use a 1/4" eyebolt (fits tripod socket) and a loop of string/cord,so you can then step into the loop to hold it down; I keep one in my camera bag. I also have a mini-tripod I got at REI which has a Velcro strap to you can attach it to a post, rail or similar object. |
|
|
|
07/10/2011 07:07:31 PM · #13 |
| 1 over the focal length was what I was always told. |
|
|
|
07/10/2011 08:17:36 PM · #14 |
I recently shot 1/30s at 300mm. Yes, some blur, but 1/30 at 300...I think its pretty good (no VR).
This is the JPG straight out of the camera.
Message edited by author 2011-07-10 22:04:27. |
|
|
|
07/10/2011 11:29:33 PM · #15 |
I held this one for a good couple seconds with no tripod. I just leaned up against a brick wall and made the band run out of the shot. One of my favorites. |
|
|
|
07/10/2011 11:36:34 PM · #16 |
1/15s, 2 exposures with in-iphone HDR. I was amazed the background was not blurred. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 02:05:08 AM EDT.
