Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 14 Sep 2017 (Thursday) 14:15
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

4000 vs 8000 shutter speed

 
James ­ Crockett
Member
James Crockett's Avatar
105 posts
Joined May 2017
Sep 14, 2017 14:15 |  #1

Do you really need 8000 shutter speed? Thanks and take care.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
john crossley's Avatar
1,970 posts
Joined Nov 2009
It's Grim Up North
Sep 14, 2017 14:16 |  #2

James Crockett wrote in post #18452313 (external link)
Do you really need 8000 shutter speed? Thanks and take care.

Yes


Some days I'm the dog, other days I'm the lamppost

LOG IN TO REPLY
Chet
For $20, I'll be your friend.
Chet's Avatar
41,462 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Post has been edited 1 month ago by Chet.
Sep 14, 2017 14:23 |  #3

For sure. (Though anything above 1/7999 is just silly)


Curator of the Bob's Pickle Emporium experience. -As always, One location to serve you better!
~Feel good today and donate to this great forum~ LINK
My Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,027 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Sep 14, 2017 14:28 |  #4

Depends on what you shoot. When I shot the eclipse to get the diamond and Bailie's beads, it sure helped.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Scatterbrained's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Chula Vista, CA
Sep 14, 2017 14:28 |  #5

Sometimes.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MrWho
Goldmember
1,160 posts
Joined Aug 2009
North of Baltimore, MD
Sep 15, 2017 00:14 |  #6

I personally can't remember the last time I've seen a shutter speed over 1/4000.


Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Scatterbrained's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Chula Vista, CA
Sep 15, 2017 00:21 |  #7

In my current Lr catalog I have 128 images shot at 1/8000 of a second.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
EverydayGetaway's Avatar
9,758 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Oct 2012
Bowie, MD
Sep 15, 2017 00:24 |  #8

No. If you find that 1/4000s isn't fast enough, stop the lens down a tiny bit. Not nearly as big a deal as some make it out to be.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
wunhang
Senior Member
wunhang's Avatar
647 posts
Joined Nov 2009
SoCal
Sep 15, 2017 00:48 |  #9

In my Lightroom catalog, my counts are as follows:
~25,400 photos
172 at 1/8000
52 at 1/6400
14 at 1/6000
63 at 1/5000
182 at 1/4000

So that means I used high shutter speeds (at or above 1/4000) less than 2% of the time. And within that 2% of the time, I needed faster than 1/4000 over 60% of the time.
Just some data from this amateur to mull over.


Canon 5D IV | Canon 5D II | XSI (Infrared modified) | SL1 | 16-35mm L f/4.0 IS | 24-70mm L f/2.8 II | 40mm f/2.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-200mm L f/4.0 IS | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | C/Y 28mm f/2.8 | Tamron 35mm f/1.8 VC | C/Y 50mm f/1.7 | Zeiss 100mm MP
::SmugMug (external link)::

LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
MalVeauX's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Florida
Sep 15, 2017 04:46 |  #10

James Crockett wrote in post #18452313 (external link)
Do you really need 8000 shutter speed? Thanks and take care.

Do I? Yes.

Do you? *Shrug*

I do a lot of HSS large aperture portraits, so I do use shutter speeds between 1/4000s & 1/8000s. I also can just use a low power ND filter. But, I would prefer not to fiddle around with more equipment when possible, so I prefer to have all the options I can in the tool and not just add more stuff externally to it. For that purpose, stopping down isn't something I want to do. And again, while I could use a ND filter, I just don't want to if I don't have to (fiddling with a filter in the field with rapidly changing light is not my cup of tea).

There are few, few times you actually need 1/8000s shutter speed. Personally if I need to freeze apparent motion, I'd rather do it with lighting because it's better at it. An example in the real world of this would be the beating wings of a bee for example (I'd rather freeze that with lighting, rather than attempting to do it with a fast shutter; assuming I didn't want motion blur).

If you don't know if you need 1/8000s or not, you probably don't?

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Naturalist
Adrift on a lonely vast sea
Naturalist's Avatar
Joined May 2007
Tallgrass prairies of northwest Minnesota
Sep 15, 2017 06:04 |  #11

I need 1/8000 about as often as I need ISO 8000 - which is RARE.


Doug
My Gear List
http://www.douglasbrow​nsr.com (external link)
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/128037573@N07/ (external link)
Entered: 2-16-84 Passed: 5-22-84 Raised: 6-19-84

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
31,912 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been last edited 1 month ago by TeamSpeed. 6 edits done in total.
Sep 15, 2017 06:43 |  #12

If you have fast primes and shoot a wide mix of scenes and conditions, you will invariably need 1/8000th. There are people that shoot ISO 50, and would like ISO 25, which is really quite similar in nature. You either shoot at a lower ISO, or a faster shutter, while maintaining the exact look you want DOF wise by locking down aperture.

Once you get an 85L, for example, you will find many times you could really use 1/8000th. The magic you can produce with the control of DOF of that lens will make you want to shoot it quite a bit, even during the late morning/early afternoon hours outside. 1/4000th won't cut in those cases. :)

Sure one could shut down the 85L 1 stop, but having had one and trying that, I would prefer to not sacrifice the look I was going for, and would rather have 1/8000th and/or ISO 50/25. Shutting down the lens is a suboptimal suggestion, why not just keep a 1 stop ND filter with you for the fast lenses you own. At least with that, you get all the control you want, and 1/4000th would be enough unless you are also dealing with some really fast motion that you want to stop, then an ND won't help either.

If you need 1/8000th, then you would most likely know it, and thus would stay away from cameras like the 6D as your primary camera right out of the gate. If you aren't sure why you need 1/8000th, then you really don't need it, at the current moment anyways.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,317 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Sep 15, 2017 07:37 |  #13

I recently gained a whole new perspective on 1/4000. I have almost never run into the 1/4000 'problem' with my 6D. I've always had ISO 50 available, and stopping down 1/3 to 2/3 stop never seemed like much of a sacrifice. Last weekend I was outside with my new camera, and the 85 1.8. I ended up having to stop down to f/4-4.5 a few times, because I was limited to 1/4000... by my ASA 200 Fuji Film. With the 6D, I could have shot at f/2. With the Elan 7NE, I was stuck two stops slower. Glad I didn't have 800 film loaded. :)


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Left Handed Brisket's Avatar
Joined Jun 2011
The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Sep 15, 2017 08:35 |  #14

ASA? OMG!

;)


1/4000 has not been a problem for me. A polarizer is about a stop of difference and I often shoot with one outside anyway.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Formerly he's gone before apostrophe-gate | Not in gear database: Canon 70-210 3.5-4.5, Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 2x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Talley's Avatar
10,089 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Sep 15, 2017 10:00 |  #15

Anytime you want to shoot F1.4 in the full sun. You need 1/8000

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

5D4 |12mm 2.8 FE | 16-35L 2.8 III | Σ 35A | Σ 50A | Σ 85A | 200 F2 IS | 1.4xIII
X-T20 | X-E3 | 18/2 | 35/1.4 | 56/1.2 | 18-135
My Gear Archive

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

9,983 views & 31 likes for this thread
4000 vs 8000 shutter speed
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00098 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.08s
Latest registered member is Andrushkevich
906 guests, 391 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016