Re: [Leica] Tripods: the Grump weighs in

[Ruralmopics@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/8/00 1:31:50 PM, michaeljohnston@ameritech.net writes:

<< More to the point is that tying yourself to the use of a tripod is going
to prevent you from taking the kind of pictures that 35mm is best suited
for. What are you going to take pictures OF? Static or posed subjects.
If you're going to be limited to that anyway, then why in the world
would you saddle yourself with the quality limitations of a tiny piece
of film?? It makes little sense.
 >>

I like handheld on-the-fly photography as much as the next guy but if this 
weren't such a family oriented discussion group I would be tempted to say 
this comment is absolute horse puck . . . but since we're so polite here, 
I'll refrain. 

It's one thing if you're talking about the stereotype photo geek who keeps 
his camera on the tripod to shoot everything -- even in bright sun -- it's 
something else altogether if you're dismissing the use of a tripod as an 
occasional but essential tool. When I go do a story I end up shooting in all 
sorts of situations. I go with one bag of equipment and try to be prepared 
for ANYTHING. I'm not like a National Geographic photographer who needs a 
couple of trucks and a few Sherpas to haul all his stuff. So for me, 35mm is 
IT for most situations. Occasionally there are times I use a tripod. Some 
recent examples come to mind . . . .

* Shooting 100 ASA film indoors with available light and filtered lenses (I'm 
sorry but I don't use fast color unless I absolutely have to). Although I was 
shooting people, camera shake was a greater concern than subject motion --the 
tabletop tripod was sufficient.
* An overall shot of a large building interior when a little depth of field 
was appropriate. Yeah I could pull it off handheld with B&W but the 100 speed 
color required a tripod
* A light streak photo of cars leaving a military base at dusk shot with a 
300 lens (4-8 second exposure) for a story on a base expansion. Yeah, I could 
have shot this on MF but we don't have a 300mm equivalent for our MF
* A photo showing a panel discussion with each "head" sharp -- made shooting 
from the side with a 180mm lens stopped down to about 11 and shot at 1/8 of a 
second. Can you handhold a 180mm at 1/8?

A tripod is lifesaver in MANY situations. It matters not that you shoot 35mm. 
Being able to slow down the shutter allows you to use better film and gives 
you depth of field options that you wouldn't otherwise have. I know the 
approach of many in this group is to just buy a f1.0 lens and shoot wide open 
but so often, editorially, that approach doesn't cut it -- "That dog won't 
hunt" is how we say it around here. To refuse to use a tripod is like saying 
I won't use any shutter speeds slower than 1/15 (or even higher with a longer 
lens). It makes no sense.

Bob