Shutter Speed for Handheld Shooting

[RalphLambrecht]

Is it doable for somebody with shaky hands (me) to shoot macro handheld? I know I should get a tripod, but I don't have one yet. I was trying to shoot some stuff using a 55mm and when it goes to 1:1, the shaking is noticeable in the viewfinder. I used a shutter speed of 1/500, will that do? What might be the lowest shutter speed to use without necessary blur?

Yes,I do it but I use a flash with a short duration as the main exposure in which case the flash duration is the effective shutter speed; I see no camera shake at all.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I use a ring flash (an old vivitar one, macroflash 5000 I think?) and even at 1/60th sync, I don't struggle hand held.

The flash duration is very short, I don't know the actual speed. So I use a tamron adaptall 90mm 2.5, the matching optical extender to get a 180mm 1:1 lens f5.6. This offers *just* enough light for acceptable focusing, although that is by far the hardest part. A true 1:1 lens that lets in more light would be a huge advantage here.

Then I stop down to whatever I need, usually an effect f 22 or smaller for depth of field and shoot. Effectively the only light is the flash duration so my effective shutter speed is in the thousandths of a second.

Takes practice though, and I must admit, I only got the feel for it when I transferred said lens to a nikon d200 and could get results immediately, educating me on the sort of film speeds that work at various distances. Cheater, I am.

Um, yeah, sure, flash will stop motion. And used will it gives full control of lighting. See my comments upthread on that point.

That said, with ISO 100 or faster film (or chip) using flash for closeup work out of doors can force some very bad compromises. This because the camera's shutter still controls exposure from ambient light.

To get flash's full benefits it has to be at least two (2) stops brighter than ambient. With ISO 100 and faster this forces using quite a small effective aperture, very wrong for closeup/macro, or using an ND filter, obnoxious.

A good solution would be to bring back ISO 25 Kodachrome. Better yet, ISO 10 Kodachrome. Fat chance of either! Failing that, a digicam that can be set to ISO 25. Fat chance of that!

 

[Dan Fromm]

Yes,I do it but I use a flash with a short duration as the main exposure in which case the flash duration is the effective shutter speed; I see no camera shake at all.

With respect to ambient light, the camera's shutter speed is the effective shutter speed. With ISO 100 and faster this can be a problem when using flash.

Ralph, my wife told me to buy a digital SLR and gave me budget. Not "sky's the limit" but enough for, say, a D810 or a Df. Because of vanity I lean towards a Df. Anyway, I've been watching what the digital types do when shooting flowers and fish in aquariums. It seems that they just crank the ISO way, way up and shoot with available darkness. Not so practical with film (when I started I tried closeup work with ambient light and HS Ektrachrome. ASA 400 wasn't fast enough.) but apparently works well enough with digital.

 

[Ian Grant]

With respect to ambient light, the camera's shutter speed is the effective shutter speed. With ISO 100 and faster this can be a problem when using flash.

Ralph, my wife told me to buy a digital SLR and gave me budget. Not "sky's the limit" but enough for, say, a D810 or a Df. Because of vanity I lean towards a Df. Anyway, I've been watching what the digital types do when shooting flowers and fish in aquariums. It seems that they just crank the ISO way, way up and shoot with available darkness. Not so practical with film (when I started I tried closeup work with ambient light and HS Ektrachrome. ASA 400 wasn't fast enough.) but apparently works well enough with digital.

I agree Dan, while Ralph is stating the flash power is controlling exposure in terms of the light intensity, it's the shutter speed and aperture plus daylight exposure that has another effect on the exposure, some photographers have use this to great effect (I'm trying to remember who )

Unlike you Dan my wife likes me buying old (late 1800's - pre WWII cameras) she even finds them herself !!!! and the rare ones (she has zero knowledge), she's found cameras I'd not have considered. What you describe is how easy digital only photographers think things are, the reality is that we as film users can step in or out of their word seamlessly.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

Ian, if and when I spend the money I don't expect the transition to a DSLR will be seamless. If nothing else, digital SLRs' controls are rather different than those of my film Nikons, even the 8008. I've looked at the candidate cameras user manuals, they're very thick. And I'm going to have to do a lot of experimenting with controlling exposure via the camera's ISO setting before I'll be confident that digital will give me the results I could easily get with slow Kodachrome.

I agree, in their way digicams are as bad for beginners as auto-everything film cameras were. They save the beginners from learning the basics. I b'lieve hat's why people who grew up with digital find the transition to film difficult.

Ralph is right, flash can eliminate camera shake's ill effects. That's one of the reasons I used and use it. But for closeup work out of doors ambient light can be a major, um, nuisance even with flash. It forces small effective apertures, i.e., guarantees loss of image quality to diffraction.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[RobC]

Adams tested for handheld camera movement and determiend that you ned 1/250 to avoid it completely. But I assume that if you are using flash and relying on ambient for some background exposure then 1/125 or 1/60 is probably perfectly acceptable since your foreground in flash will be dominant and having the background a miniscule blurred will probably help isolate the foreground.
In short if you are worried about it just use maximum sync speed since there's nothing more you can do than that. And if that means you need a bigger aperture then you have to weigh up the compromise between whats being flash exposed and whats being ambient exposed. Thats your call.

 

[compasiune11]

I think this is focal range x 1,5 times at least

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Is it doable for somebody with shaky hands (me) to shoot macro handheld? I know I should get a tripod, but I don't have one yet. I was trying to shoot some stuff using a 55mm and when it goes to 1:1, the shaking is noticeable in the viewfinder. I used a shutter speed of 1/500, will that do? What might be the lowest shutter speed to use without necessary blur?

You need lots of light with macro anyway.So, why not use a flash with a very short flash duration, which will end up beingyour exposure time;problem solved.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Folks, the original poster last posted to this thread September 15, 2011. Might it be time for us to stop trying to help it?