Beechcraft From Germany, joined Nov 2003, 808 posts, RR: 52 Posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3626 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Hi all,
maybe it´s time for another of these Masterclass topics, this time focusing on the effect of shutter speeds on the photo.
Probably most of this will be interesting to beginners only, as it is mostly quite basic info, but maybe even some of the "oldtimers" here can learn something...
So, share your experience, e.g. which speeds do you use to create motion, or prop blur, which speeds do you have to use for different focal ranges in order to get sharp shots, how do you set your camera, what has it got to do with the aperture, etc...
Remember, this should be a learning environment, there are no dumb questions
Dazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3548 times:
For me, I shoot anything with rotary parts, ie helicopters or props at between 1/50 and 1/100. Certainly nothing faster than 1/100 unless its moving fast. My panning technique has a lot to be desired so I tend to try and shoot jets with at least 1/100 at shorter focal lengths and 1/200+ at the longer focal lengths. The longer the focal length, the faster I want the shutter to be because of camera shake (oh I miss IS so much!). As a rough guide, I always try and use a shutter speed equal to the focal length. eg 300mm = 1/300 etc. It obviously all depends on the conditions of the day and how adventurous you're feeling!
Darren
Equipment: Canon EOS 50D & 350D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-85 USM, 75-300 IS USM,Speedlite 430EX
Dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1353 posts, RR: 70 Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3528 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
My general philosophy is to use the highest shutter speed that I can get away with for jets and the lowest I can get away with for props.
The reciprocal of the focal length is a good guide for static objects but for moving objects a faster speed is often required.
Darren is a better man than I if he can get away with 1/50 or 1/100 sec regularly with moving objects and my norms are 1/1000 sec for jets and 1/250 for props, perhaps 1/400 if the focal length is long. With moving subjects I anticipate losing a few to shake. I use the big and unwieldy Bigma (I am big and unwieldy so a good match) and that is not easy to handhold.
I always use shutter priority as it is rare to see an image spoiled by inappropriate aperture but regular to see them spolied by shutter speed, too high and frozen props, too low and shake.
I do use Image stabilisation at times, a tripod and cable release which allows for considerably lower shutter speeds but find anything below 1/60 sec, even the slightest breeze causes movement and is not necessary either.
1/60 sec, ISO 100, F16
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2629 posts, RR: 34 Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3524 times:
Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 3): My general philosophy is to use the highest shutter speed that I can get away with for jets and the lowest I can get away with for props.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2665 posts, RR: 65 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3484 times:
Well done Denis for launching a good thread like this - too few of such things these days.
I have to say I still choose Aperture Priority as my 'default' setting for photography, but this is historical and based on my love of landscape photography, where depth of field is so crucial. So I have to think more consciously about shutter speed, as inanimate objects/scenes tend not to be so susceptible to movement issues. I get away with this with airliners, as I generally end up in the 1/400th area with decent lighting, and I don't lose images to blur this way. However, I have taught myself to look in the viewfinder at what shutter speed my chosen aperture is giving me, to ensure it is not too slow.
The exceptions for me with planes are fast jets and prop aircraft. I have been caught out in the past by thinking I could freeze a fast jet with my 'normal' shutter speed. But now I will choose Shutter Priority and take the route Mick proposed above. With prop aircraft I do the same, but with the opposite intention - getting the slowest shutter speed I can get away with that will minimise risk of camera shake (with no tripod) and also not be so slow that the movement of, say, a taxiing aircraft will cause motion blur. Here is an example:
Some may say there is the slightest hint of motion blur here on the nose, but I would argue that the blurred props enhance the overall shot/motive significantly. This was taken at 1/100th. But here you need to think about the consequent very small aperture that can result - not ideal unless you have a high quality lens and also, if your sensor is dirty, the result can look pretty horrible and require a lot of 'healing' in editing.
This same shot above with no thought given to shutter speed could look very ordinary. In fact, frozen props in such circumstances can look pretty horrible aesthetically, in my opinion. Shooting prop aircraft/helicopters with no thought given to shutter speed can give a much less pleasing looking motive.
Of course, it almost goes without saying that a panning motive requires thought about shutter speed from the outset. There you are looking at 1/40th and lower to get a really nice effect.
ThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 1618 posts, RR: 55 Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3447 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT
Thanks for opening the class Denis!
As a standard I also use the reciprocal of the focal length as guidance to set the shutter speed but as already mentionned this is not suitable for every motive. Darren, Mick and Paul already pretty well described the "extra" cases so I just wanna put in some amendments.
Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 3): my norms are 1/1000 sec for jets and 1/250 for props
Personally I think these shutter speeds are already too fast; i.e. a jet passing by at low level with a shutter speed of 1/1000 is literally frozen to the background wheras if you give it a little slower shutter, say 1/400 you get a nice sense of speed:
The same applies for props; while 1/250 can be fine if the engines are running at high RPM (during take-off and/or high speed passes) it will be deadly at low power (approach, taxi):
While we're at taxiing aircraft, keep in mind that though it is nice to have a blurring prop effect, too low shutter speeds can give a devastating result when applied to aircraft moving quickly, especially when moving towards you; while you don't really notice the movement the camera does, so you'll have a nicely blurred prop but the rest of the plane will also look pretty blurred and that's one thing you don't wanna have.
Also don't feel obliged to always get a blurred prop; some shots look better without:
Quoting Psych (Reply 5): Of course, it almost goes without saying that a panning motive requires thought about shutter speed from the outset. There you are looking at 1/40th and lower to get a really nice effect.
Correct, but then again keep in mind that flying is a 3-dimensional thing and while the aircraft might seem to move perfectly straight when passing you by it might well move a little up and down or even sideways; another thing that you probably won't notice but your camera will, resulting in a blurred image.
Basically you can get anything, from the high speed shutters:
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 4131 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3434 times:
Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 1): As a rough guide, I always try and use a shutter speed equal to the focal length. eg 300mm = 1/300 etc.
Something to remember is crop factor, the effect that this has on what you perceive as "focal length" also affects the influence of lens shake on the final image so on a 1.6 crop factor DSLR your reciprocal shutter speed would be 1/420sec...or 1/400 as I am not sure I have seen a camera with 1/420 setting.
When shooting at slow shutterspeeds, at least in bright sunny conditions you will likely need to use a small aperture, often as small as F22 or even smaller this will make sensor dust into a nightmare so keeping your sensor clean is vital
Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 7): This might sound a bit dumb, but what effect do varying shutter speeds have on overall image sharpness?
In a perfect world, none(or very little) A perfect world would be one where a perfectly vibration free camera and lens was solidly mounte taking images of a perfectly still subject in constant uniform light, very few of us shoot in those conditions.
Real world, shutterspeed, aperture, focal length etc all combine in different degrees to provide the image we are seeking.
Quoting EK20 (Reply 2): In sports mode what would you recommend for motorsports?
I could take this thread right away from an aviation topic answering this and get my knuckles rapped by the mods(again)
Quickly though motorsports is almost always fast moving subjects, unlike aviation which rarely is. Contact me via my profile for more detail on how to shoot motorsports.
Once again, thanks Denis for starting this Masterclass, I think they are a valuable addition to the forum.
My only other question is.. would it be possible to unarchive the earlier Masterclass threads so members can continue to update and learn from them?
Cheers
Chris
PS I will write more about motorsports photography if the forum would like me to.
[Edited 2007-05-03 01:48:30]
Of course old planes are safe, how do you think they got to be old?
Overall .... - If you read only ONE book about Photography all things in this thread are explained, etc, etc ....
I still cant understand why people buy DSLRs and dont know Shit about Photography = If you buy a car (even a shit one for 500,-- EUR) you normally should have a driving liscence ??!!!
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 4131 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3411 times:
Quoting Rotate (Reply 9): Overall .... - If you read only ONE book about Photography all things in this thread are explained, etc, etc ....
Robin makes a very good point but I would expand on that a bit, should be 2 books, one on photography, someone like John Hedgcoe, Michael Freeman are names that come to mind but there are many more and the other book? You don't even need to buy it, it comes with the camera. READ THE MANUAL
cheers
Chris
Of course old planes are safe, how do you think they got to be old?
JeffM From United States, joined May 2005, 3252 posts, RR: 58 Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 8): Something to remember is crop factor, the effect that this has on what you perceive as "focal length" also affects the influence of lens shake on the final image so on a 1.6 crop factor DSLR your reciprocal shutter speed would be 1/420sec...or 1/400 as I am not sure I have seen a camera with 1/420 setting.
That's not quite true. You lens is only so long, your crop is just how much of the image hits the sensor. Nothing more. There is NO increase in focal length, thus no increase in reciprocal shutter speed is required. Look it up on any of the better photography sites.
Odo From Finland, joined Jan 2005, 8 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3399 times:
Quoting JeffM (Reply 11): That's not quite true. You lens is only so long, your crop is just how much of the image hits the sensor. Nothing more. There is NO increase in focal length, thus no increase in reciprocal shutter speed is required. Look it up on any of the better photography sites.
Well, yes, but the effect is ~same as you'd have a longer lens. I don't see people taking lots of sharp images with digicams that have 70mm lens at the long end with 1/70s when effective "focal length" is 420mm.
JeffM From United States, joined May 2005, 3252 posts, RR: 58 Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3390 times:
Quoting Odo (Reply 12): I don't see people taking lots of sharp images with digicams that have 70mm lens at the long end with 1/70s when effective "focal length" is 420mm.
Well that is because the actual focal length is 70mm. Your comparison of a p&s compared to a 35mm body and lens is a poor one. Do you know what focal lenght really is? It doesn't seem like it.
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2095 posts, RR: 40 Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3387 times:
Quoting Rotate (Reply 9): I still cant understand why people buy DSLRs and dont know Shit about Photography = If you buy a car (even a shit one for 500,-- EUR) you normally should have a driving liscence ??!!!
Some people like to learn a new hobby. I don't understand why some people take the attitude that people who admit they don't know something, but want to learn are abused by people for not having their level of knowledge. Thats the whole point of this forum. Why post if you're unwilling to help?
Now sure, one can read a book. But a book doesn't usually give several different points of view unless it is written by several different authors. The whole point of a photography forum is to provide a facility to ask the questions you don't know the answers to.
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 4131 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3375 times:
Quoting JeffM (Reply 11): There is NO increase in focal length, thus no increase in reciprocal shutter speed is required. Look it up on any of the better photography sites.
This could get quite technical so I will try and avoid that.*
Yes, Jeff I know the Focal length is THE Focal length and nothing short of rewriting the laws of physics can alter that(and neither Jeff nor I are capable of that.)
The reciprocal rule- let's make some assumptions here, if a 300mm lens on a FF camera requires 1/300sec shutter speed to produce an acceptably sharp image at say 8x10 inches. A photograph taken with a 300mm on a 1.6 crop factor will require more magnification to cover that same 8x10 inch print hence any blur present will be magnified.
(Note I am not talking about FOV here because that would be different using the same lens)
Let me put it another way, still using a 300mm on a FF camera and 1/300sec shutter speed, for the same field of view on our 1.6CF camera we would use a 185mm lens(actually 187.5mm but I have never seen one of those). This image would require more enlargement to match our hypothetical FF 8x10" print hence any camera shake induced blur would be magnified.
Therefore my suggestion to keep the shutter speed above 1/"perceived focal length"
And yes I know there is considerable difference of opinion on the "better photography sites" as well
Cheers
Chris
*Jeff, not keeping it simple for your benefit, if it was a one on one converstaion we could get much more complex.
Of course old planes are safe, how do you think they got to be old?
JeffM From United States, joined May 2005, 3252 posts, RR: 58 Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3360 times:
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 15): A photograph taken with a 300mm on a 1.6 crop factor will require more magnification to cover that same 8x10 inch print hence any blur present will be magnified.
That is where you make your mistake. Your print size makes absolutely no difference. All your 300mm lens is doing is allowing light to fall onto a surface within the body, maybe film, maybe a sensor. The exact same amount of light is coming through the lens, the difference is that on a 1.6 crop body a lot of it falls outside the dimensions of the smaller digital sensor. 'Wasted' so to speak, as the sensor is smaller then 35mm.
The magnification done by the lens is exactly the same. Exactly. The size of the frame is the only thing that has changed resulting in what appears as an image shot at a higher magnification if reproduced at the same print dimensions as an image produced from a larger sensor, or 35mm film.
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 4131 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3334 times:
Quoting JeffM (Reply 16): That is where you make your mistake.
And I did, have redone the math and will concede defeat... don't anyone tell Jeff I said that.
Back to the thread concept, shutter speed.
Considering where many of us shoot at. Big flat open expanses of ground, often windy, standing on rocks, perched on ladders I would suggest it is a good idea to shoot at something higher than the reciprocal speed.
Oh and the wind, we use long lenses with long lens hoods, if it is windy take them off, they are a great sail that will blow your lens and camera around.(the sun would be behind you to get those nice bright front lit Airliners.net pics any way) Back to my first point.. if it is windy add some more shutter speed
Cheers
Chris
PS these points do not apply to creative photography but as Denis said this is about basics.
[Edited 2007-05-03 08:15:00]
Of course old planes are safe, how do you think they got to be old?
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2095 posts, RR: 40 Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3299 times:
Quoting Rotate (Reply 19): Not sure, if you read my whole post, but there is defenetely some help in it ..... - Just try to read through it and you might find it ....
Yeah. I read it.
But it was all undone by the comment...
Quoting Rotate (Reply 9): Overall .... - If you read only ONE book about Photography all things in this thread are explained, etc, etc ....
I still cant understand why people buy DSLRs and dont know Shit about Photography = If you buy a car (even a shit one for 500,-- EUR) you normally should have a driving liscence ??!!!
So I ask you, what gives you the right to make such a comment? The last time I checked, you don't need a licence to buy a dSLR. I am amused that there is something you feel that you know that sets you apart from other budding photographers who would like to learn the art.
In fact, I remember a thread not so long ago requesting opinions on this shot...
EMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 882 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3276 times:
I have to agree with Monteycarlos a bit here. Some of the comments come across as a bit arrogant and offputting to the new people on reading this like myself, whether they are meant like that or not.
Quoting Rotate (Reply 9): I still cant understand why people buy DSLRs and dont know Shit about Photography
Do you mean don't know shit about photography or aviation photography? I have quite a bit of knowlede and experience with landscape, abstract etc phtography but aviation photography is totally new to me and is quite different from what I have done before. I am finding it hard to get a shot accpeted so these mastercalss type posts are really good for beginners.
I would agree that if you didn't know what appature or shutterspeed where at all then you should go and read a book or something but this post is about the different techniques of shutterspeed isn't it?
Andy S
Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2629 posts, RR: 34 Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3271 times:
Quoting Rotate (Reply 9): I still cant understand why people buy DSLRs and dont know Shit about Photography
It is hard to understand. Maybe it's because they think that a good camera will turn them into a good photographer? Or are they just too lazy or stupid to learn the basics? Or lazy AND stupid? Now THERE'S a lethal combination.
We shall probably never know. But who cares? Leave them to themselves.
Rotate From Switzerland, joined Feb 2003, 1378 posts, RR: 26 Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3269 times:
Guys
Whatever! I just sayed that it is smart to read a book and or the manual about the thing you hold in your hands - Thats it!
Call it arrogant or whatever! I am just trying to give you a hint what to do to make it better in the future ... - Try to get more Info (not only this Forum) ---- > Read a book, check other forums, go out experiencing, etc, etc ...
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2095 posts, RR: 40 Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3253 times:
Back to the point:
A lot of people swear by light meters and using them to create the correct exposure. I personally haven't used one since I intend to spend my money on a new speedlite. How have other people found them, especially with lower grade cameras such as the 400D where control over the overall image is not as good as say the 30D or D2X?
I for one am interested to hear the process people use to set up a shot using a light meter.
With good reason - a light meter can turn a good shot into a great one. For an accurate incident light reading, just hold up the meter in the same light as is falling on the subject. Simple and virtually foolproof.
Viv
26 Monteycarlos: Not having seen or used one, do you set by aperture or shutter?
27 Dazbo5: I wouldn't say regularly! That's one reason I love digital, you can take a few shots and choose the best of the bunch. This is one example taken at B
29 Monteycarlos: So, anyone else have any advice on light meters? Worth the money? How about for other styles of photography such as landscapes with varying levels of
30 Fergulmcc: Second that!! No Photographer should be without one!! If you can't afford one then a simple Grey Card will do the trick and improve your shots. Searc
31 Monteycarlos: Thanks Fergul. You've always been more than helpful. I think I have seen this forum before so I will go back and take a look. CalgaryBill recommended
32 JeffM: What is amusing is that you don't understand the concept of "experience" and it's effect on any skill. He asked a question didn't he? "why do people
33 TransIsland: I'm surprised that heat haze hasn't been mentioned as a factor for deciding shutter speed yet; it's probably my main consideration. This was taken at
34 Fergulmcc: I'll accept that I am not the most experienced photographer here, but I am failing to see how heat haze will effect shutter speed. Using a high shutt
36 Acontador: Tell me something about heat haze! Clearly, the less hot air between the object and the lens the less heat haze.
37 TransIsland: Heat haze is essentially a movement in the air. At a high shutter speed, you record little to none of this movement, whereas at a slow shutter speed
38 AMSA: I must agree with Rotate in some point. It's very true that there are people who buys expensive/quality equipment (mainly lens and cams) and don't kno
39 Boeingfreak: Errr.... I do not consider myself as a pro but my experience is that the blur and the distortions remain, no matter if the shutterspeed is slow or ve
40 Lanas: Hi guys First of all, many thanks to Denis for opening such a valuable thread. And second, thanks to all of you guys for such an amazing feedback! I u
41 Boeingfreak: Yes, the result is the same. The highest currently is Olympus with a 2x crop if I'm correctly informed. It doesn't affect the image quality at all, i
42 Fergulmcc: Yes but does heat haze not cause distortion? Therefore no amount of shutter speed will eliminate that. I mean if you shoot something in the summer wh
43 StealthZ: I am with Fergul, Jeff and others on this. Yes, heat haze is partly movement of the air but not much and not very fast. What does the damage to your p
44 Monteycarlos: Because the text you quoted clearly indicates that. I find it bizarre that in the past you were so willing to help people improve themselves with thr
45 StealthZ: This may be part of the cynicism that some display, and not just Jeff or Robin(or me) Don't think any of us have a problem with the kid(whatever thei
46 JeffM: I'll be honest with you. I could give a rat's ass about setting any examples, let's get that out of the way. You missed the point about you feeling R
47 CalgaryBill: Someone beat me to it, but you can set by either. The light meter has "aperature" and "shutter" modes, so you set the one you want (ie: in the spirit
48 Monteycarlos: Jeff, I never diagreed with that at all. If you look back, my gripe with Rotate is with his criticism of people getting out there and doing it themse
49 Dendrobatid: OMG, Moteycarlos, you make me feel very old (LOL) Ansell Adams had a book about the zone system. Much of his incredible work was done in the 1930s an
50 CalgaryBill: Be careful of stuff written directly by Adams, it can be really dry and really technical - even if you "get" what he's selling, you may fall asleep b
51 Monteycarlos: Hehe right what I really want it for. I only shoot planes because I work at an airport and get good access. Landscapes are where my passion is. Hopin
52 Sulman: To reiterate what Mick says, I struggle on jets even using the reciprocal rule of thumb. I've lost more shots to motion blur than any other issue - fo
53 StealthZ: James, Get along to a motor race meeting, not F1 or anything stupid but a regional or club meeting. In fact the smaller meetings are ideal for a numb
54 Dendrobatid: Stealth talks a lot of sense above, I hate to admit it, but he does. There is little in photography where the old saying of practice makes perfect is
55 AMSA: You're absolutely right. If people buys expensive equipment with the goal of learning and being interested in photography, even if they haven't touch
56 Javibi: Depending, of course, in what you are trying to achieve, right? Difficult, but not impossible Same here... j
57 Diezel: When taking pictures at slow shutter speed, specially when panning, it's not a bad idea to put your camera in the clack-clack-clack-clack mode instead
58 Agill: Why? I mean it's their money. An expensive camera hardly will stop them from learning, and a lot of people like to buy top of the line stuff because
59 Lanas: Hi guys I´ll take this thread to ask a question that I believe doesn´t deserve opening a new thread. I want to know how the size of the sensor affec
60 TS-IOR: What is better for planespotting, the auto mode or the sports mode ?
61 Fergulmcc: Well have we been proven wrong??? takle care Fergul
62 TransIsland: Sorry... I've been travelling and the weather's been shite.
63 TransIsland: No, I have been proven wrong. Gulfstream Brasilia at 200mm, one photo at 1/125 sec. the other at 1/1500 sec.
64 StealthZ: Cheers Stephen, Not everyone is big enough to do that!! Chris
65 Fergulmcc: No worries Transisland! and thanks for comming back on that. I just didn't think higher shutter speeds would eliminate heat haze. You learn something
66 Monteycarlos: Yeah except as I learnt, you leave yourself open to contrast rejections due to the sunrise/sunset making the fuselage 'not a perfect white'. My solut
67 Fergulmcc: You hum it and I'll sing it, Been there!!!! Take care Fergul
68 StealthZ: And that generally means before 8:30!!
69 Flyfisher1976: If you take a few shots with a DSLR and don't know "shit about photography" nobody dies, you just erase the CF and start again...no big loss. Sorry,
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Nov 2003, 808 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 1001 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2629 posts, 
From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 1618 posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2095 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Feb 2003, 1378 posts, 
From United States, joined May 2005, 3252 posts, 
From Finland, joined Jan 2005, 8 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
