View Poll Results: If you are going to shoot a subject that you know you will want to make larger prints
- 92. You may not vote on this poll
I always use a tripod
Depending on speed
I rarely use a tripod. I mostly shoot people and never could get used to an anchor on my camera. I mostly shoot 400 or ASA so I can get fast enough shutter speeds not to worry to much about camera shake. I can hand hold down to about 1/4 of a second with my 50mm. I just shoot a camera like a shoot my rifle, breath in, hold, squeeze.
I love big prints.
If I know in advance that I will be shooting a subject that may be worthy of a big print, I will use a big steady tripod, 6x7cm or 6x9cm format ISO 100 film, and a prime lens set at its sharpest f/stop.
If I am in a situation where things are changing so rapidly that there is no time to set up or move a tripod, I will use a monopod if I can.
I routinely carry a tabletop tripod.
I use a tripod whenever possible. Only when moving around on the floor to get some good shots of my son I shoot handheld. Actually I did some shots of shopwindows just before christmas with Fuji T64 film and 85mm, 1/8sec @1,4. They came out tacksharp.
I tried some handheld shots of my son sleeping with the P6X7 and Delta 3200.
A couple of those came out blurred. I think they were shot at 1/60 sec, f/4,5, darned 75mm. That P6X7 is definitely not a lowlight camera.
Send from my Electronic Data Management Device using TWOFingerTexting
Technology distinquishable from magic is insufficiently developed
I think the biggest attribute of 35mm is its flexibility - you can use it when you would be hard pressed to use something else. As such - there are many situations where a tri-pod can't be used, and I find myself using it for those applications most often. But whenver it is at all practical, I mount it on a tri-pod, its like upgrading your camera system for free!
I try to avoid using a tripod in 35mm because I love the freedom and speed of hand holding. If I think it is worth getting the tripod out I might as well put my medium format on it. Most of my 35mm shooting is when I am around family and friends and I find a tripod is not always appropriate to a relaxed atmosphere. If I take a 35mm out for a walk or for landscapes then it is because I want mobility and do not want to be focused too much on photography at the expense of enjoying the walk.
Also, I am a believer in exploring opportunities within your limitations. A 35mm without a tripod clearly has issues for overall sharpness etc so I tend to push myself to different types of photos than I would take if I had the tripod - wide aperatures, picking details out of the landscape, lots of out of focus backgrounds etc etc This is often a good discipline for me and makes me think more creatively.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
In MF I allways use a tripod.
The main reason why I bought a 35mm is the flexibility of use without a tripod, therefore in 99% of all pictures I don't use one.
I have a Leica M. and I can shoot nice, not perfect, but nice pictures handheld at 1/15th - 1/30th
This speed in combination with a fast 1.4 lens and 400 asa makes the leica a very verstile camera, allthough questionable is the investment required.
In pre-Leica times I shot with FM3a and a 1.4 lens, without tripod, but 1/60th was the max, and even then most pictures came out wobbly.
I shoot mostly after dark, I do clubs (folk, Jazz) and performers on stage as well as club impressions, a MF system is a no-go in these situations. So at first being very reluctant towards the Leica pricing system I am eventually happy with the results.
I have Leica a MP and M6TTL, 35mm Asph. 1.4, 50 summilux 1.4 and 75mm 1.4 lenses, really quite an investment, but paying off rather well at the moment.
Much of my 35 mm work is closeup with flash illumination. I do nearly all of that hand-held. With flash, the only ill effect of motion (mine, subject's) is poor focus, and with mobile subjects that's an acceptable risk.
With long lenses, shooting hand-held is impossible.
Otherwise, it depends on the situation. When not shooting from tripod, I try to brace myself against something solid if that's possible.
I used to shoot a lot of 35mm color and I always used an SLR on a tripod. When I started shooting more black and white, I bought a Leica and stopped using a tripod. It really wasn't the color vs black and white thing that changed my tripod use, it was due to a change in subjects. I started using 35mm for subjects that were more dynamic in nature--where the print quality was secondary to the subject matter.
I have a terrible time composing without a tripod. the horizon looks like a velodrome.
art is about managing compromise
Depends on the situation. For street-type stuff the tripod can sometimes be a liability, so faster films and the same holding/breathing/triggering techniques I use for high power rifle competitions are the orders of the day. For landscape shots (yes, those CAN be done with a 35mm) I use a tripod and MLU. In those situations I've often joked that, if I could afford a forklift, I'd use a 2-ton block of concrete for a tripod. In short, I try to use the tripod with all formats whenever possible. When I shoot without one I'm prepared to accept the lower percentage of "keepers."