Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,719   Online: 792
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48

Thread: Rule Of Thumb

  1. #21
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,470
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    The really interesting point is that your father taught you this for MF. Historically, the rule of thumb was developed [pun intended] for MF and then in the 1960's and 1970's at the photo stores I worked at*, we started telling the customers to use the rule for 35mm cameras.

    Steve


    * one was Baker's Photo on Wisconsin Avenue Washington DC NW
    That's what I thought. Thanks for setting that straight.

    As the attachment in post #12 shows, moving the rule from MF to 35mm was a leap of faith, but, as others have pointed out, it's just a rule of thumb anyway. For optimal resolution, a good tripod and solid ground are essential.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  2. #22
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by hoffy View Post
    Do others use this rule, or is it total bunk. If others do, how would you apply this to say, 6x7 Medium Format?

    Cheers
    I think the 1/FL rule works fairly well, but mostly in the long FL extreme. For wide lenses I feel that I can go much longer than 1/FL.

    For medium format, I would suggest thinking in terms of field of view. For 35mm, the FL=FOV in degrees, approximately. You get something like 50 degrees diagonal angle for a 50mm lens. But for MF and LF the FOV is much bigger, of course.

    A 50mm lens on 6x6cm square gives a field of view of ~80 degrees i.e. superwide. With a superwide on a medium format rangefinder I find that I get acceptable sharpness at ~1/8 sec, and even further with good bracing.

    In the end, it's all very individual. Technique matters for sure. How much you enlarge matters to, of course. But overall, I very seldom think of 1/FL when shooting- the timing of the scene usually decides my exposure. When I was doing sports and birds etc. with 35mm I thought of 1/FL more often.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #23
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    For medium format, I would suggest thinking in terms of field of view. For 35mm, the FL=FOV in degrees, approximately. You get something like 50 degrees diagonal angle for a 50mm lens. But for MF and LF the FOV is much bigger, of course.

    A 50mm lens on 6x6cm square gives a field of view of ~80 degrees i.e. superwide. With a superwide on a medium format rangefinder I find that I get acceptable sharpness at ~1/8 sec, and even further with good bracing.

    FOV Comparisions:
    For 35mm which I know the FOV well I use the translation for MF. For example for 6x6 80mm is normal, so 150mm , which is about double, would be like a 100mm in 35mm. 250mm MF is about three times 80 so that is equivalent to a 150mm in 35mm.

    For large format, 4x5, I take the focal length and divide by three so a 150mm is approximately a 50mm lens in 35mm; 127mm to 135mm 4x5 is approximately like a 30mm to 32mm in 35mm. Thus a 270mm is roughly like a 90mm lens in 35mm.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #24
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,973
    Images
    6

    Don't forget the caffeine factor and other movement

    I notice that if I have too much coffee, my hands aren't as steady. When I hand hold a camera with slow shutter speeds, I take deep breath, exhale then gently squeeze the shutter. I carry a Gorillapod in my camera bag. It's such a versatile tripod, the tripod can be rested on or wrapped around. Along with a tripod, mirror lockup and a shutter release helps too.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,165
    Images
    2
    I agree with Ralph always use a tripod or some other way to steady the camera whenever possible. Since some thumbs are steadier than others their rules sometimes don't work.

  6. #26
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffreyg View Post
    I agree with Ralph always use a tripod or some other way to steady the camera whenever possible. Since some thumbs are steadier than others their rules sometimes don't work.
    Are you thumbing your nose at the rule?
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    When shooting with my Leica + 50mm lens I know that using 125th of a second I always get good sharp shots, there's no mirror to bounce.
    Even after Ralph's demonstration, you still believe that mirror bounce myth?

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Since the final print size is typically unknown, or could change in the future, it is common to make sure that camera shake is below the CoC. That's why I used it as a criterion in my posts.
    And rightly so.

    We must not forget that the rule is about when hand holding will begin to deteriorate image quality.
    And it does that completely independent of whatever else we may think of that can do that too.

    Using the CoC as a measure for the degree of degradation is fine, since you can't get 'better' than that. It doesn't imply that we need to look at those other things we can think of that could degrade image quality as well.

    The comparison is between, the rule about, hand holding. And nothing else.

  9. #29
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,195
    When you break it down to the elements of shutter speed and focal length it holds well. Doubling the focal length requires 1/2 the shutter duration for the same amount of motion blur. (Since many people think of shutter speed as the denominator only, then it would be twice the speed)

    In terms of what is the minimum shutter speed you can hold, that is user dependent and easily checked.

  10. #30
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    No it doesn't make any more sense, have a coffee wake up

    It's entirely possible to get sharp images at slower speeds, just less likely, and there's to many variables. It depends how you're standing, holding the camera, type of cameras etc.

    When shooting with my Leica + 50mm lens I know that using 125th of a second I always get good sharp shots, there's no mirror to bounce.

    It's just a very loose rule of thumb, no more than that.

    Ian
    It is a rule of thumb. Get over it. It is a guide for the minimum speed for a typical photographer. Not everyone. If you are the exception, then the exception proves the rule. A few years ago at APUG someone claimed that they could hand hold a Rollei for half a second consistantly. Actually, it was quite apocryphal. I wonder what he was snorting, but he no longer posts here.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin