Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4000 vs 8000 shutter speed

 
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,235 posts
Likes: 1626
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Sep 20, 2017 06:27 |  #91

mdvaden wrote in post #18456269 (external link)
There's probably little gain to show what you think would be worse or better by an increment, because what seems most practical is a photo closer to what I want even if it's merely one increment worth. For example, the image below was shot at f/1.2 ... and regardless what anybody else thinks, that's the depth of field I liked so just a few needles are in focus. To go f/1/8 or f/2.0 instead would have increased depth of field by 60% or 70%. This was shot from close to 6 ft. away.

QUOTED IMAGE

Was i shot at f/1.2 and 1/8000th? It's a good example of fine use of shallow DOF but does it also top the cameras speed limitation. Would 1/4000th have killed the image. I'm guessing it was shot much slower than that but without exif, I'm guessing.


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
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,315 posts
Likes: 249
Joined Jan 2010
     
Sep 20, 2017 08:42 |  #92

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18456292 (external link)
I honestly can't say that I have... I'm usually pretty aware of what settings my camera is set to so I know when/what I need to change if the moment calls for it. I can see how that would potentially be useful, but we're talking about a 1-stop missed exposure for a hypothetical shot... seems like a lot to fuss about over 1 camera feature.

That's a lovely shot.

I'm still not convinced that it wouldn't be just as lovely at f2 (though in this example I'd be surprised to hear this was above 1/4000s anyway), but as you said, that doesn't really matter. What does matter is that I still think it's silly to shell out a huge amount of extra cash for an added stop of SS. Which is why my first response to the OP's question "Do you need 1/8000s?" was and still is "No.".

You're designing the game around your own playing style.

There are people who want maximum DOF, some or all of the time. On a sunny day, they can not shoot in M mode at 1/4000 and f/1.4 or thereabouts or lower, with many cameras, without blowing matte whites.

This is not a subtle issue for them. The camera either allows using their lens wide open without clipping, or it doesn't. This is a binary thing for them. They are forced to have more DOF than they want and what their lens allows.

For those people, a 1/4000 shutter speed limit can be a major PITA, until cameras start having DxO-like "Measured ISO" values at base ISO of 50 or less, and even lower for f/0.9 lenses.

I don't know why you think it is trivial that it is dangerous to open your lens all the way on some cameras. Trivial to you perhaps, and many others, but very real to others.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
904canon
Member
121 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Dec 2012
Location: NY
     
Sep 20, 2017 08:55 |  #93

HSS




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 20, 2017 09:22 |  #94

John Sheehy wrote in post #18456447 (external link)
You're designing the game around your own playing style.

There are people who want maximum DOF, some or all of the time. On a sunny day, they can not shoot in M mode at 1/4000 and f/1.4 or thereabouts or lower, with many cameras, without blowing matte whites.

This is not a subtle issue for them. The camera either allows using their lens wide open without clipping, or it doesn't. This is a binary thing for them. They are forced to have more DOF than they want and what their lens allows.

For those people, a 1/4000 shutter speed limit can be a major PITA, until cameras start having DxO-like "Measured ISO" values at base ISO of 50 or less, and even lower for f/0.9 lenses.

I don't know why you think it is trivial that it is dangerous to open your lens all the way on some cameras. Trivial to you perhaps, and many others, but very real to others.

I think he's aware of 1/8000, and sometimes that's really hard to hit, and other times, the light is just so harsh that for a given type of light, you'de have to stop down one click.

the thread premise is based on how badly 1/8000 is a NEED, and I think the answer is not really. 1/8000 is about as needed as F0.95 lenses I would say. I like shooting wide as the next guy, f0.95 @ 1/8000


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


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 20, 2017 09:24 |  #95

904canon wrote in post #18456454 (external link)
HSS

I think this is the most legit reason for 1/8000 need. In some scenarios, it may not even be enough, but certainly better than 1/4000


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,637 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2342
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 20, 2017 10:07 |  #96

This is like asking if we really need photography at all. Do we need cars that can exceed the speed limit? Do we need supersize options at fast food joints? Do we need such a variety of food options at the grocery store? Do we need 4K? Do we need internet? Do we need religion? Do we need politics? Do we need debt?


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
8,469 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1692
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Sep 20, 2017 10:27 |  #97

whatever you're smoking tally, save some for me.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mdvaden
Goldmember
Avatar
2,227 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 547
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Post edited 10 months ago by mdvaden.
     
Sep 20, 2017 10:37 |  #98

Charlie wrote in post #18456473 (external link)
I think he's aware of 1/8000, and sometimes that's really hard to hit, and other times, the light is just so harsh that for a given type of light, you'de have to stop down one click.

the thread premise is based on how badly 1/8000 is a NEED, and I think the answer is not really. 1/8000 is about as needed as F0.95 lenses I would say. I like shooting wide as the next guy, f0.95 @ 1/8000

The OP and your reply both show that the thread may revolve more around desire than a certain answer. Because as you note that 1/8000 isn't really needed, using the f/0.95 example, we could also say 1/4000 is about as needed as f/1.2 lenses.

Not a bad question though. I enjoy hearing all the variables people introduce in replies.


vadenphotography.com (external link) . . . and . . . Coast Redwoods Main Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 20, 2017 10:54 |  #99

Talley wrote in post #18456492 (external link)
This is like asking if we really need photography at all. Do we need cars that can exceed the speed limit? Do we need supersize options at fast food joints? Do we need such a variety of food options at the grocery store? Do we need 4K? Do we need internet? Do we need religion? Do we need politics? Do we need debt?

well, you can certainly expand the 1/8000 debate.

why not 1/32,000?

is that a "need"?

I'de say it's a nice feature, but could I do without? yeah, sure.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
teekay
Goldmember
Avatar
2,880 posts
Likes: 468
Joined Apr 2001
Location: British Columbia, Canada
     
Sep 20, 2017 11:19 |  #100

I suggest that most of us don't "need" a whole lot of the features and settings (all those auto"scene" options, for example) that are available on most cameras now, but on occasion it's good to have them for specialized shots or experimenting.

For example, I have 1/16000 electronic shutter available on my Panasonic FZ1000 and used that shutter speed taking videos of fluorescent lights with interesting results.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,101 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 362
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Post edited 10 months ago by pulsar123.
     
Sep 20, 2017 13:22 |  #101

As many people suggested, a 1/4000s camera plus an ND filter works just fine for most of those situations where you would need 1/8000s. In fact, with f1.2 you might find yourself in a situation when even 1/8000s is too long, but a 8x ND filter would fix it just fine.

This is the same question I was asking myself when I made a recent switch to FF, from 50D ( which has 1/8000s) to 6D (which doesn't). Just in case I ordered 8x ND filters for my faster lenses (like 135L), but honestly I don't expect using them much. In my experience, every time you feel you need 1/8000s is simply a wrong time of the day to take that photo.


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
Avatar
2,380 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 3898
Joined Mar 2014
     
Sep 20, 2017 13:50 |  #102

I understand being at a location at 6 am for a sunset being the wrong time of day to take that photo ..


But not everything happens during those sweet spots


Fuji XT2 / Panasonic GH5 / Sony A7R3 / Canon t4i / Pentax K1000
My portraits IG (external link)My everything else IG (external link)
MY flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,694 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Likes: 1274
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
Sep 20, 2017 17:33 |  #103

I'm not a professional. Among other things, this means I can usually choose the time of day I'm out and about. I tend to have better results in the later afternoon hours... as the sun is not as high in the sky and the shadows are more pronounced.

Even in those conditions, I've used a shutter speed faster than 1/4000. I know I'll have to adapt some if I want a different lens on my 6Dc, for instance... using a two camera setup. It isn't rocket science..and I don't have any f/1.2 or even f/1.4 glass at this point. Heck, I seldom shoot my 100-400L ii at f/5.6... I'm usually at f/7.1 or 8 to get the whole heron or other larger wading bird in focus. Smaller birds... well, for those, I do open things up a bit.


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,361 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2203
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
Post edited 10 months ago by Two Hot Shoes. (2 edits in all)
     
Sep 20, 2017 17:50 |  #104

My feelings are it's only one stop & I know some will go on about how they need [LIke] bokeh or DoF or something, that's fine and if you only want that, well f/1.2 or 0.95 on a full frame is where you'll probably end, needing 1/8000.

These days I think most new cameras have a good electronic shutter, I know my Fuji goes up to 1/32,000.
So for a lot of situations the 1/8000 mechanical shutter is a moot point as you can just move into the E shutter. And yes I know the rolling shutter effect on moving subjects.
Here's one at ISO200 [native base on the Fuji] shot at 1/20,000 at F/1.2. Could have shot this as 3.2 I guess if I only had 1/4000, wouldn't have made much difference but it's just an example

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4338/35788092963_308995b5d3_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Wwtk​cz  (external link) DSCF6397 (external link) by Kim Farrelly (external link), on Flickr

Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T2, X-T1, X-E2 | 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 10-24/4. ThinkTank AS2, Peli1514, Ona Bowery, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom
Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 20, 2017 18:04 |  #105

Phoenixkh wrote in post #18456750 (external link)
I'm not a professional. Among other things, this means I can usually choose the time of day I'm out and about. I tend to have better results in the later afternoon hours... as the sun is not as high in the sky and the shadows are more pronounced.

Even in those conditions, I've used a shutter speed faster than 1/4000. I know I'll have to adapt some if I want a different lens on my 6Dc, for instance... using a two camera setup. It isn't rocket science..and I don't have any f/1.2 or even f/1.4 glass at this point. Heck, I seldom shoot my 100-400L ii at f/5.6... I'm usually at f/7.1 or 8 to get the whole heron or other larger wading bird in focus. Smaller birds... well, for those, I do open things up a bit.

you can certainly investigate how often fast prime shooters actually run into 1/8000

85 f1.2 thread: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1048516

Of course you can look at your own library and see how often you hit 1/8000

I see a shot, 10:16AM, 1/4000, f1.2.

considering the photo was a little underexposed, I would guess that not until 11AM, would 1/8000 be triggered, and it would likely last till 4pm.

so if your subject is adventurous enough to stay in direct sun during those times, then you're in the clear. And one more thing, from 12PM - 3PM, you may need 1/16000 ;-)a


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

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

36,775 views & 31 likes for this thread
4000 vs 8000 shutter speed
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is alexjmck
418 guests, 361 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.