Shutter speed equal to or faster than focal length?

[threeholerglory]

Recently I have been reading that for "optimal results" (my personal interpretation of information at hand), it is recommended that you shoot with a shutter speed that is equal to or faster than the focal length being used. For example, using a 300mm lens, a shutter speed of at least 1/300". What is the benefit of doing this? Sometimes faster is certainly better, but I never knew there was a direct relationship between focal length and shutter speed. Is this to reduce lens shake due to the decreased view angle at a longer focal length? Thanks for the input!

[Derf]

Editied to make sense..... Proof that writing while doing 3 things at once is not good


What they are referring to is a speed in what you can hand hold with a reasonable sharpness. The slower you go...the more focused you need to be still.....the more you zoom in, your movements are magnified with the zoom and you need a faster shutter.

These are more basic guidelines... As you pracitce, you can shatter the rules...but you also have to know your limitations or it could be the difference between a magic moment or a lost shot.
http://www.longislandwallpapers.com/photos/291493240_2Rprj-S-1.jpg
28MM f/2.8 1/10th sec 1600

Rule of thumb...You need to figure out how far you can go above this!!!
for anything under 100mm Shoot at the focal length but you got to be stable and not shakey to get the shot
20mm = 20th of a second
60mm = 60th of a second
100mm = 100th of a second
200mm = 400th of a second
300mm = 600th of a second
(I know you saw that over 200mm is doubled the shutter speed) as you get longer you need
to worry about other things....LIKE WIND! It is a general guide that is to be followed so you can get a good idea on what your limits are. I have shot 300mm at 1/10th of a second and got a tack sharp image....the thing was, I shot about 300 shots in high speed mode hoping one would come out. I knew how hard it would be and worked very hard to get that shot just in stance alone!

When you do not have the light, IS, and fast long glass...you have to lear every trick in the book to increase your ability to get the shot with a lower ISO and a tight Apature.

When there is not enough light you can do thing to improve your long shutter shots
FORMORST is CHEAT! put the camera on something or push it agains the wall or be creative, but cheat!

if you have to hold it,
first is stance.... like your golfing, feet apart...
second make sure you are only turning at the waist....SMOOTH
third take a deep breath
fourth make sure that you are squeezing very gently as you are tracking.

Of COURSE this is done only when you are well past the limits of what we are really talking about here (focal = Shutter).

the slower the shutter speed, the more blur will happen. You can use IS to help, but that will go so far and it is nice to know how much. When I shoot props at 250th of a second (for prop blur).... I need to be steady with a 300mm.... for jets I bump it up around 1000/th of a sec to be safe (light permitting). It is nice not to worry

for best results all shots taken at 300mm for something like aviation
1000/th sec...no sweat
600/th ....pass a beer please
300/th of a second...stand straight
250th of a second....stand straight....feet apart...
100th of a second....stand straight....feet apart...no coffee.....take a deep breath.....hold...wait 1 sec for body to steady....gently squeze off a good burst!!!
1/10th sec ...have a heart attack with the 10 second timer on (or a tripod like I have)

This is about what is possible for me

[Derf]

Disclamer: The views provided above to not reflect NYCAvaiton or the views of its members and any time. Always wear eye protetion while looking into the sun directly with a long zoom lens. If anyone ever asks you if you are press...your answer is "I am independent!". That is all!

[PhilDernerJr]

Good Diclaimer,Derf! :)

[nwafan20]

Yeah, but experiment, find your limits. I find I can shoot up to 300mm with only 1/200th, but that is me, other people are different.

[Derf]

I can shoot much slower....My hands are also rock steady....By balance is great so I do have a lot going for me there. Practice will help lower your numbers....try taking pictures of cars panning in low light at about 1/10th of a second.. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER...after about 1000 pictures, you will see a NOTICABLE difference. You have learned how pan and keep steady. These two things are key to lowering you shutter rate.

When a helicopter passes and I drop it down to 100th of a second at 300mm...I have to pop off a burst of 8 shots... number 5 and 7 are usually the best..... I know this well and I know for the desired effect, I understand that the first and last shot will look like crap, my body will continue to steady as long as I am panning correctly. IT IS LOTS OF WORK to better yourself, but when you have a night shot that has almost no light and you can hand hold it.....it is worth the wear on you shutter that it took to get you there.

My name is Fred... and I have a problem!

[lijk604]

and this is why Fred takes 20,000 photos on airshow weekend. 8)

[Derf]

Not even close!!! it was 16,400 from Friday to Sunday afternoon....The entire week may have been a little over 20k!

But none of those were blurry!!!! ;)

[threeholerglory]

Thanks for all the input! I wasn't sure if there was some kind of hidden intricacy built into the lens that has some direct relationship to the shutter speed, just as each lens has its "sweet spot" for aperture.

That notion didn't make too much sense to me as I have a relatively sharp photo at a 1/6" pan on a 300mm...here's the link if y'all wanna check 'er out.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikescuder ... 8/sizes/o/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikescuderi/2715809908/sizes/o/)

P.S....could someone explain how to include pictures in a post? I'd greatly appreciate it!

[moose135]

P.S....could someone explain how to include pictures in a post? I'd greatly appreciate it!

Just enclose the URL of the photo with the image tags (use the "Img" button). Be sure to use the actual photo URL, not the page where it is displayed:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2715809908_8cdbc116b3_o.jpg

[Derf]

that picture is blurry....nice for the speed, but it is not sharp if you blow it up to full size.

(very nice for that slow)

[threeholerglory]

thanks for putting it up...can you somehow post an example of how that picture would look as far as loading it into a post? perhaps putting an additional character at the very end of the "link" would prevent the actual picture from being displayed so i can see what you mean by the "actual picture URL". (I'm brand new to all this...)

As for the shot itself, it's certainly not the best I hope to achieve but I'm pretty happy with the results as it was my first attempt at shooting that slow...normally I can nail the 3/4 pan at about 1/100 just about every time in decent light.

Thanks!

[Derf]

.......As for the shot itself, it's certainly not the best I hope to achieve but I'm pretty happy with the results as it was my first attempt at shooting that slow...normally I can nail the 3/4 pan at about 1/100 just about every time in decent light.

Thanks!


It is great for that low of light....blow that up to banner size and you will see that it is not sharp. I am not trying to knock the image as it was a wonderful low light capture....but take the same shot with 1/1000 of a second...then you will understand sharp.

[moose135]

thanks for putting it up...can you somehow post an example of how that picture would look as far as loading it into a post? perhaps putting an additional character at the very end of the "link" would prevent the actual picture from being displayed so i can see what you mean by the "actual picture URL". (I'm brand new to all this...)
When I went to your original link, it was the Flikr page which displays your photo. By right-clicking on the photo, and selecting "View Image", it shows the original image alone in your browser, and the URL in the window will be that of the actual photo. In this example, it was:
<http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2715809908_8cdbc116b3_o.jpg>

Put that URL (less the <> symbols) between the --- tags:
***http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2715809908_8cdbc116b3_o.jpg*** (without the asterisks) and that should display your photo.

[threeholerglory]

oh yeah, I have no doubt that it's not as sharp as it could be...except 1/1000th would render the shot waaaaay underexposed as I shot it just before dark. I appreciate the input!

Could someone show me how to place an image within a post? I would love to become more involved with the site as I just joined...I just don't understand the "image URL" part.

Thanks!

[Derf]

sorry, that should have said take that during the day at 1/1000ths of a second and you will understand sharp. sorry -Fred

[adam613]

Yeah, but experiment, find your limits. I find I can shoot up to 300mm with only 1/200th, but that is me, other people are different.

Yeah because your lens has an image stabilizer. If you are using an IS lens, you can shoot at a much slower shutter speed and still get sharp shots.

For example, at 300mm, the rule of thumb says you should shoot at at least 1/300 sec. If you're using a lens with a two-stop image stabilizer (like the Canon 100-400), you should theoretically be able to shoot at 1/75 second and get sharp shots. If you're using a lens with a lens with a three-stop image stabilizer (like the Canon 70-300 IS), 1/40 sec should do it. Again, it depends on how steady you are, but it gives you a bit of breathing room if your shutter speeds get a bit too low.

[Derf]

Here is a slow shutter with my 70-300mm (No IS)
http://derf.smugmug.com/photos/346870791_CNvsA-O.jpg
No editing, no cropping at 70mm 1/25th of a second...... I had to work for it!

what mode IS do you have?

[threeholerglory]

I have the Canon 300mm F4....in all honesty, I am not certain which "mode" it has whether it is two or three stops, but I have been able to shoot down to 1/25th with half decent results with little technique. Otherwise, it has the typical 2 modes of stabilization, one being for normal use (vertical and horizontal shake prevention) and the other for vertical shake, used for panning.

Just need a little more practice with it.

1/60th panning with the 300...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3025/2705066582_c637a1ce51_o.jpg

[threeholerglory]

I have the Canon 300mm F4....in all honesty, I am not certain which "mode" it has whether it is two or three stops, but I have been able to shoot down to 1/25th with half decent results with little technique. Otherwise, it has the typical 2 modes of stabilization, one being for normal use (vertical and horizontal shake prevention) and the other for vertical shake, used for panning.

Just need a little more practice with it.

1/60th panning with the 300...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3025/2705066582_c637a1ce51_o.jpg

[Derf]

Crackin shot there!!! Some parts are soft and the window is sharp but this is because of the panning and low shutter rate.... KEEP PUSHING IT!!! Your good and I would hate to see what happens with practice! Use the things in this thread to get you better.....but you got it so far.

Please remember, I am being super critical!!! Both shots were keepers and I would have been proud to take them. It sounds like I am putting your work down in this thread, but it really is not like that. Keep going, we are already seeing great things from you.

Good topic, More pics!!!! :borat:

[threeholerglory]

Thanks for the input! All the input is greatly appreciated and none is taken negatively, only constructively. Perhaps I'll start a new thread for all panning shots...should be interesting!