[tsk1979]

Wrong, no matter what condition whether its snow, pitch dark, raining. india losing cricket match or whatever, if your shutter speed is below 1/focal length, chances of camera shake increase in non stabilized hand held shots.

So if you are shooting at 25mm(35mm equiv), then you need a shutter speed of atleast 1/25 to get a non blurred shot.
Of course you are free to use a faster shutter speed, for example 1/2000, 1/4000 or whatever, but if you use 1/15, chances of a blurred shot increase.
If you are a surgeon and have exceptionally steady hands, then this may not apply to use. I know people who can shoot 1/100 with a 400mm lens, handheld, unstabilized, and still get sharp shots.

[Jaggu]

I never knew how the sensor cleaning works in Canon and found out that it has 3 things incorporated in auto sensor cleaning, pretty interesting:
Canon EOS 450D Digital SLR Camera - Canon UK

EOS Integrated Cleaning System
Canon’s built-in dust prevention system uses three methods to keep images blemish-free. (1) Specialised materials reduce dust generation within the camera. (2) A Self-Cleaning Sensor Unit shakes dust from the sensor each time the camera is turned on or off. (3) Stubborn dust spots are mapped for easy removal in Digital Photo Professional.

[it_inspector]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Wrong, no matter what condition whether its snow, pitch dark, raining. india losing cricket match or whatever, if your shutter speed is below 1/focal length, chances of camera shake increase in non stabilized hand held shots.

So if you are shooting at 25mm(35mm equiv), then you need a shutter speed of atleast 1/25 to get a non blurred shot.
Of course you are free to use a faster shutter speed, for example 1/2000, 1/4000 or whatever, but if you use 1/15, chances of a blurred shot increase.
If you are a surgeon and have exceptionally steady hands, then this may not apply to use. I know people who can shoot 1/100 with a 400mm lens, handheld, unstabilized, and still get sharp shots.

Thank you, You just said it yourself it depends upon the person taking the shot.

In my particular case, i rarely take on assignments and when i do, i rarely get them out of studio or at day time, either way i end up using a tripod.

Btw, don`t mind but here`s a handheld 8sec shot inside a moving car with nikon 50mm @ f6.5 at 1:15am and i am definately not a surgeon. And i was definately not the driver, my friend was driving at that time at around 100kmph. If you do 100% zoom its looks like blur but its bad JPEG compression as the original RAW file is a little over 50mb while JPEG is around 28mb.

[tsk1979]

Well all I can say is that you have incredibly steady hanbs.
Normally, if you want to get over 80% shots without camera shake, you need to have 1/focal length shutter speed. What was the shutter speed of this shot.
I have also gotten shots without shake at 1/30 with 50mm lens, however out of 3 shots i took, 1 did not have any shake, but 2 were blurred.


BTW,. which car is it?

[SPARKled]

Shutter speed greater than 1/focal length of the lens is the formula devised during the film camera days when everything was full frame. In this era of crop sensors does this formula still hold good? I am asking this as I have always felt that it always helps to go with shutter speeds greater than the 1/eqivalent 35mm full frame focal length with crop DSLRs. Going with the original formula has a greater probablity of camera shake creeping in. This is particularly true with longer focal lengths above 200mm

[tsk1979]

It still holds, its just that you use 35mm equiv
So if you have 1.6 crop camera with a 300mm lens, you will need a s shutter speed of 1/480 to get a 90%+ probability of shake free shot.

Now this does not mean you will never get a shake free shot at slower shutter speeds.
You can look at lens stabilizations tests.
For example on one review sites they took a 300mm stabilized lens, and shot 100 frames, without stabilization at 1/100, about 50% were in focus, with stabilization turned on 100% of them got in focus.
So even at 1/100, they got a lot of shots in focus

[it_inspector]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Well all I can say is that you have incredibly steady hanbs.
Normally, if you want to get over 80% shots without camera shake, you need to have 1/focal length shutter speed. What was the shutter speed of this shot.
I have also gotten shots without shake at 1/30 with 50mm lens, however out of 3 shots i took, 1 did not have any shake, but 2 were blurred.

Don`t take me wrong, i get your point 100%. Its just that there are too many variables and in all fairness and honestly i have even seen Nikon Matrix metering failing. But in the end there are exceptions and too many variables for each individual/unique condition.

Shutter speed was 8 sec.

Its a Camry, Manufacturing yr05, got it earlier this yr when i had to collect money for treatment, had to sell my F6 and BA XR6T and downgrade to camry alone. God i miss my F6.

BTW,. which car is it?

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Shutter speed greater than 1/focal length of the lens is the formula devised during the film camera days when everything was full frame. In this era of crop sensors does this formula still hold good? I am asking this as I have always felt that it always helps to go with shutter speeds greater than the 1/eqivalent 35mm full frame focal length with crop DSLRs. Going with the original formula has a greater probablity of camera shake creeping in. This is particularly true with longer focal lengths above 200mm

Originally Posted by tsk1979

It still holds, its just that you use 35mm equiv
So if you have 1.6 crop camera with a 300mm lens, you will need a s shutter speed of 1/480 to get a 90%+ probability of shake free shot.

Now this does not mean you will never get a shake free shot at slower shutter speeds.
You can look at lens stabilizations tests.
For example on one review sites they took a 300mm stabilized lens, and shot 100 frames, without stabilization at 1/100, about 50% were in focus, with stabilization turned on 100% of them got in focus.
So even at 1/100, they got a lot of shots in focus

Does it really change with sensor size ???? I mean lens size, aperture all stay the same, even the imagig circle is same, its just that with introducing crop factor we are only using part of that imaging circle. Focal length still remains the same, its just that we are not only seeing PART/CROP of it. Maybe i am just way off topic here.

hhhmmmm

I am going to share my Scanner camera concept (kinda ripped off others but simplified for everyone with calculations and for cheapness) and mobile stabliser.

But not sure if mods will allow it. Either way these are just designs, still need to find time to actually construct and experiment with them. There are similar models available in the market but cost way too much eve for professionals, for example professional Scanner Camera known as Sphero Cam costs $1000+ to rent for a day.

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

It still holds, its just that you use 35mm equiv
So if you have 1.6 crop camera with a 300mm lens, you will need a s shutter speed of 1/480 to get a 90%+ probability of shake free shot.

Now this does not mean you will never get a shake free shot at slower shutter speeds.
You can look at lens stabilizations tests.
For example on one review sites they took a 300mm stabilized lens, and shot 100 frames, without stabilization at 1/100, about 50% were in focus, with stabilization turned on 100% of them got in focus.
So even at 1/100, they got a lot of shots in focus

Yes I have been lucky to get shots at shutter speeds less than the focal length of the lens but these have been pure luck, cant get these consistently. But since I do not have stabalized lenses shutter speed is very very important. I have to be atleast 1/lens focal length at a minimum (low keeper rate though) and ideally slightly more than the 35mm equivalent focal length to improve keeper rate.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by it_inspector

Does it really change with sensor size ???? I mean lens size, aperture all stay the same, even the imagig circle is same, its just that with introducing crop factor we are only using part of that imaging circle. Focal length still remains the same, its just that we are not only seeing PART/CROP of it. Maybe i am just way off topic here..

Yes it does.
Take a P&S for example. At wide angle, the focal length of the lens is around 5mm, which can be upto 30mm in 35mm equiv.
So that does not mean that if you shoot at 1/5 unstabilized, you will get a sharp shot.
So at wide angle, with actual focal length of 5mm, you have to shoot at approx 1/30 or whatever the 35mm equivalent be to get a above 90% guarantee of sharp shot.

[Samurai]

I was about to boast about the steady hand-held shots I got at very low speeds. Then I remembered my camera has body based IS.

[chaudhrysan]

@SPARKled

Yes, people do advise that to take into account the crop factor, in dSLR this rule should be revised to 1/(focal length * crop factor). How far this is valid, I don't know. But I guess there is no harm in following it as and when possible.

@ IT Inspector

Boss, no offence to you, but rules of thumb are general guideline that deliver the results 90% of the time. They are not the ultimate avice but nevertheless should not be considered as bad advise just because they may not be applicable at all times. Yes, there will be times when the circumstances or the results required do not allow you to follow them and yes, there will be exceptional people who can work comfortably outside these limits.

As you have pointed in your example, try taking a photograph of a black wolf in the background of snow. Yes, you will have to use ND filter and maybe flash if required and yes, blending of different exposure levels in the digital darkroom will help. This is an extreme case where to get the right exposure for the background without under exposing the subject is exremely difficult. But this has nothing to do with camera shake. If I am to take this shot at 300 mm without using a tripod, I shall still risk camera shake if I shoot at slower than 1/300 (or 1/450, as the digital gurus advise). Ofcourse, steadier people will be able to do it at lower shutter speeds.

[Proxima]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I was about to boast about the steady hand-held shots I got at very low speeds. Then I remembered my camera has body based IS.

Samurai, you seem to be rubbing it in to the Canon and Nikon owners like myself.

[it_inspector]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I was about to boast about the steady hand-held shots I got at very low speeds. Then I remembered my camera has body based IS.

That is the best thing about Pentax and Olympus, even the bloody 1950`s lenses get IS. Imagine using TAIR-3, TAIR-3s, Novoflex and CCCR lenses, just throw in M42 to K mount and get IS. But sadly pentax isn`t working to get pro market which is quite frankly stupid since they are in the best position to launch a FF DSLR body.

I am going to end the conversation by saying in-lens IS will always be better than in-body IS due to the ability of angular correction.

Originally Posted by chaudhrysan

@SPARKled

Yes, people do advise that to take into account the crop factor, in dSLR this rule should be revised to 1/(focal length * crop factor). How far this is valid, I don't know. But I guess there is no harm in following it as and when possible.

@ IT Inspector

Boss, no offence to you, but rules of thumb are general guideline that deliver the results 90% of the time. They are not the ultimate avice but nevertheless should not be considered as bad advise just because they may not be applicable at all times. Yes, there will be times when the circumstances or the results required do not allow you to follow them and yes, there will be exceptional people who can work comfortably outside these limits.

As you have pointed in your example, try taking a photograph of a black wolf in the background of snow. Yes, you will have to use ND filter and maybe flash if required and yes, blending of different exposure levels in the digital darkroom will help. This is an extreme case where to get the right exposure for the background without under exposing the subject is exremely difficult. But this has nothing to do with camera shake. If I am to take this shot at 300 mm without using a tripod, I shall still risk camera shake if I shoot at slower than 1/300 (or 1/450, as the digital gurus advise). Ofcourse, steadier people will be able to do it at lower shutter speeds.

I was talking more towards exposure issues i have faced than actual camera shake, maybe its just my hands since i didn`t had a particular issue with camera shake, unless i intended it (panning).

[Torqueguru]

Originally Posted by Proxima

Samurai, you seem to be rubbing it in to the Canon and Nikon owners like myself.

Hahaha! True, I agree!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Proxima

Samurai, you seem to be rubbing it in to the Canon and Nikon owners like myself.

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Hahaha! True, I agree!

I prefer to enjoy the rare moments like this.