1.5X Sensors VS. Full Frame and other questions...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Progressiveabsolution, Apr 27, 2006.

  1. Progressiveabsolution

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    Must be your method of opening .........
     
    Neil Ellwood, Apr 30, 2006
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    Ya, I always figure one's hands should be used to open the tripod...
    ....No need to use one's back-side.
    :)
     
    Mark², Apr 30, 2006
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. Progressiveabsolution

    Alfred Molon Guest

    But at just 6MP and at wide angle you should get sharp shots, unless of
    course you are unable to hold a camera steady. With the Olympus 5050 I
    was able to get blurless shots down to 1/13s at wide angle (handheld).
    I'm currently using a Sony R1 (10MP) and get sharp handheld shots at
    even longer exposure times (checked the images at 100%). But then the R1
    doesn't have a big mirror which goes up and down and causes camera
    shake.
     
    Alfred Molon, Apr 30, 2006
    #63
  4. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    I'll leave you to your opinion.
    One man's treasure...
     
    Mark², Apr 30, 2006
    #64
  5. Progressiveabsolution

    Don Stauffer Guest

    Actually, mine isn't carbon fiber, it is aluminum. I'd estimate it
    weighs less than two pounds. Cost me twenty bucks.

    Yep, takes a bit of time, not good for snapshots, but ordinarily on
    snapshots you don't worry about depth of field and such. If you want a
    quality shot, it takes some effort.
     
    Don Stauffer, Apr 30, 2006
    #65
  6. Progressiveabsolution

    Alfred Molon Guest

    This opinion is the 1/f rule - focal length in your case is 38mm (35mm
    equiv.), so an exposure time 1/38s or shorter is sufficient for a
    handheld shot.
     
    Alfred Molon, Apr 30, 2006
    #66
  7. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    I am very well aquainted with this "rule."
    -So well aquainted as to understand its limitations, and to recognise that
    it applies only to a certain degree of what we call "acceptable sharpness."
    The words, "acceptably sharp" are SO subjective in meaning that to discuss
    it further is likely a waste of our time. Again...it has a great deal to
    do with enlargement and end-use/purpose.

    In any case...my shutter was 1/13th...not 1/38th...and even if it had been
    1/38th, I would have definitely reached for the tripod...just as I would
    have definitely avoided ISO 400. While you may find ISO 400 on a 10D
    fine...I would never choose it unless I had no alternative means of sharp
    capture. That certainly happens, but not in this case. When the world
    around me was on fire (literally) a couple years ago, I cranked it up to ISO
    3200 and shot what I could before I was overtaken by smoke and flame.
    Happily, I wasn't facing that in Yosemite. :)

    My life will go on if you never agree...
    ;)
    I don't say you're wrong...just different. There are lengths other photogs
    are willing to go to that I am not...so we all have our own levels of
    scrutiny. By many standards, I am sloppy a great portion of the time, so
    please don't think for a minute that I somehow feel like you're doing
    something "wrong." I don't.

    -Mark²
     
    Mark², Apr 30, 2006
    #67
  8. The image wouldn't be "pin" sharp though. Try it and see. Crop in really
    close and have a look. Take the same picture on a tripod with a remote
    shutter trigger (cable or IR). You will see the difference unless your sensor
    or glass are not very good.
    Without blur is not a solid line in the sand. The lack of blur is a "typical"
    viewing. There are some things that you simply can't get without handholding
    (or good luck on a tripod), but it is more a matter of opportunity than it is
    technique. A landscape doesn't move, plan for it and take the best picture
    that you can with your equipment. Settling for handheld because you are
    impatient and feel the 1/fl rule (for 35mm) is adequate will only give you
    adequate results.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, May 1, 2006
    #68
  9. You WILL notice the increased sharpness on a 6MP sensor by using a tripod at
    the exposures mentioned in this thread. 6MP is NOT a marginal solution.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, May 1, 2006
    #69
  10. The 1/fl rule applies to 35mm. Perhaps in the days of digital and crop
    sensors, it should be 1/35efl (1 / 35mm effective focal length). Thus, a 60mm
    lens on a Nikon D70 1.5x crop sensor would mean you should shoot no slower
    than 1/90s.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, May 1, 2006
    #70
  11. Progressiveabsolution

    Alfred Molon Guest

    His shot was taken at 25mm. The 38mm already included the effective
    focal length.
     
    Alfred Molon, May 1, 2006
    #71
  12. Progressiveabsolution

    Alfred Molon Guest

    I guess it depends on the photographer then. The rule for me actually is
    "2/f", not just "1/f". I do examine my images at 100% and know what I'm
    talking about.
     
    Alfred Molon, May 1, 2006
    #72
  13. Progressiveabsolution

    ASAAR Guest

    You may know what you're talking about, but it's just that you're
    satisfied with your results. Using your example of f/8, ISO 100
    and 1/80th sec., you say that it allows for blurless handheld shots.
    But consider if you took the same shot with an ND filter, allowing
    you to use f/8, ISO 100 and 1/20th sec. That would probably have
    easily seen blur. Taking the shot at 1/80th sec. doesn't eliminate
    blur, it only reduces it. It may be that at the size you make your
    prints the blur isn't easily noticeable, but whatever blur exists
    would almost certainly be reduced if a tripod was used. If that
    reduction isn't noticeable in your prints, then you'd have no reason
    to carry the extra weight of the tripod, but that may limit the size
    of your prints if you ever decide that you want to make an unusually
    large print. Then you'd be limited by your personal rule.
     
    ASAAR, May 1, 2006
    #73
  14. Progressiveabsolution

    Alfred Molon Guest

    If the images look crisp and sharp at 100% with a handheld shot, why
    should I use a tripod? Nothing against tripods, but they are a pain to
    set up (never mind about the bulk and weight), so I only use them when I
    have to.
     
    Alfred Molon, May 1, 2006
    #74
  15. Progressiveabsolution

    ASAAR Guest

    I explained why, but that's not the real issue here. It's that by
    saying that you can take a "blurless handheld shot" you invite
    argument by those that take your statement literally, that your
    images contain zero blur, when you seem to mean that for your
    purposes you can take "handheld shots with no apparent blur". You
    might also have indicated whether your "blurless" 1/80th sec shots
    are limited to any of the C-8080's focal lengths, as I don't think
    that the results you'd get at the (effective) 140mm long end would
    be as acceptable as what the 28mm wide end can produce.

    I agree, but with a difference. For me the extra bulk and weight
    is a far bigger pain than the inconvenience of having to setup or
    remove the camera from the tripod.
     
    ASAAR, May 2, 2006
    #75
  16. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    Right.

    Except that the "rule" is only a guide for what most would deem "acceptably
    sharp" pictures.
    It simply will not consistently keep up with the same shot taken on a
    tripod.
    Not even close.

    Perhaps you should hold off on arguing further until you routinely produce
    images with a wide format printer. I really think that until you get into
    that "mode" of scrutiny, we're not going to get anywhere.
     
    Mark², May 2, 2006
    #76
  17. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    I don't doubt that you know what you're talking about.
    I just doubt (with a fair amount of certainty) that our standards are the
    same.
    Or...that simply our needs are different.

    I still have shots from my old 3.25MP Canon D30 that I only WISH I used a
    tripod with! I have some beautiful handheld shots that simply don't hold
    up, due to a lack of tripod support. And yes...as a matter of fact...even
    at 3.25 MP, it makes a difference.
     
    Mark², May 2, 2006
    #77
  18. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    Nobody is forcing you to use a tripod.
    :)
    If you're happy...then great!
     
    Mark², May 2, 2006
    #78
  19. Progressiveabsolution

    2 Guest

    If all else fails, lower your standards. Right?
     
    2, May 2, 2006
    #79
  20. Progressiveabsolution

    Mark² Guest

    If you think I am suggesting that, then you haven't been paying attention in
    this thread.
    Apparently some feel that way. I do not.
    Read.

    -Mark²
     
    Mark², May 2, 2006
    #80
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.