Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Shutter speeds --
From: datamaster at northcoastphotos.com (Gary Todoroff)
Date: Wed Jan 30 22:43:06 2008
References: <4cfa589b0801301117k2a1b1d0eg826d2e5acc845ed3@mail.gmail.com> <0JVH007DABXLQHF0@l-daemon> <200801310033.m0V0XwGF027303@humboldt1.com> <47A13410.5010608@waltjohnson.com>

Not saying it's impossible to get the shot at slow speed, Walt, just 
a lot less likely. One of the advantages of digital in low light -- 
you can shoot a lot of extra shots quickly and at no extra expense, 
knowing that one of them will probably be fairly sharp. The portrait 
I took at 180mm (90mm Summicron-R) equivalent at:
http://www.northcoastphotos.com/Lympa_2006_03_14.htm
was the only one out of seven or eight that came out sharp. The 
blurry ones definitely would not have worked at all.

The slow shutter speed contest sounds fun - I'll have to brush up on 
my target shooting technique! Rules?
Gary Todoroff

At 06:36 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote:
>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
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 
>269.19.17/1252 - Release Date: 1/30/2008 8:51 PM


Replies: Reply from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Shutter speeds --o.k., the rules)
In reply to: Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] Leica Announcement (?) - No M9 this year; M8 Upgrade)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Leica Announcement (?) - No M9 this year; M8 Upgrade)
Message from datamaster at northcoastphotos.com (Gary Todoroff) ([Leica] Shutter speeds -- Leica Announcement (?) - No M9 this year; M8 Upgrade)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Shutter speeds -- Leica Announcement (?) - No M9 this year; M8 Upgrade)