Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I've seen incredibly sharp images which bored me to death. I've seen less than sharp image which would tear your heart out. Product work and most commercial work must be sharp. Except where the art directors intend to make the images look real. Something else, it is not impossible to shoot at 1/60th or 1/30th and get sharp images. Matter of fact a "slow shutter" monthly contest sounds like fun. Gary Todoroff wrote: > The ability of photographers to hand-hold at slow speeds is vastly > over-rated. Or else those "rock-steady" guys only print up to 4x6 inch > prints. Ninety percent of the reason I use Leica optics is because I > can shoot them wide open. If I want *really* sharp, then I stop them > down maybe half a stop. Having seen the effects of helicopter > vibration even with the Hasselblad lens top speed of 1/500th, I'm not > optimistic about sharpness at slower speeds (Why I use a > gyro-stabilizer for aerial photos). Below 1/250, I'm always looking > for posts, walls, tables, garbage cans, anything to brace me and the > camera. If that fast lens allows me a faster shutter speed, all the > better. When I see photographs that did not need depth of field shot > at f8 and 1/60th, I shudder. Usually, so did the photographer - a > $2000 lens capable of tack-sharp, and an image blurred by a slow > shutter speed. Crazy! > > The main reason I am so passionate about the Olympus E-330 is the Live > View flip screen that allows me in dim light to brace the camera in > all kinds of places where I would never be able to get my head behind > the optical finder. See example of in-flight cockpit interior at: > http://www.northcoastphotos.com/Lympa_2007_02_17.htm > > http://www.northcoastphotos.com/Lympa_2008_01_09.htm also shows what a > fine combination the E-330 and 50/1.4 Summilux-R make in dim light. > > Once in awhile, I need d-o-f and f22 - > http://www.northcoastphotos.com/Lympa_2006_12_31.htm > see last photograph on page. But that's what tripods are for. Right, Ted? > > Gary Todoroff > Tree LUGger > > > At 03:00 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote: >> Not sure who wrote this but here's my response. >> >> > JOOC, how often do people use 1/4000? I can't remember the last time I >> went above 1/500. More often it's 1/4 sec or even 4 sec (with tripod of >> >> > course).<<< >> >> I find this interesting and wondered why the photographer who posted >> didn't >> use higher shutter speeds? But when shooting with a Leica I've pretty >> well >> always tried to use the "Highest possible shutter speed and widest >> aperture >> for the best exposure possible." >> >> Why if a camera is equipped as Leica's are, Ok older models, a 1/1000 >> of a >> second, why wouldn't one use the highest shutter speed to assist in >> cutting >> down the possibilities of camera shake? >> >> Unless of course the subject you're shooting requires a "blur effect" >> for >> the content. >> >> Similarly with widest aperture? Why not use the widest opening >> possible to >> assist in getting rid of or softening unwanted debris in the background. >> That is unless one requires a great depth of field,. IE: everything >> sharp >> from here to the moon. >> >> Any answers out there folks? >> >> ted > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >