"Sharpest" shutter speed when using a tripod?

[pentaxfun]

What I mean is, in terms of like, the way how if you are attempting to max out your sharpness all the way for a picture, you:

1. Lock the mirror up

2. Use a tripod

3. Use the sharpest lens you have at its sharpest focal length and aperture

4. Use a wireless remote to initiate the shutter

etc etc

What I'm wondering is, based on occasionally noticing people make brief, vague references to it: are there certain shutter speeds that are "sharper" than others, all else being equal. As in like, let's say that I'm God, and I can control how bright the sun is or whatever, and so overall exposure value isn't an issue, so I can do whatever shutter speed I want, will my photo be ever so slightly less sharp if I use, say, a super high shutter speed of like 1/4,000 or something, compared to say, 1/200, or 1/15, or 5 seconds, or etc? Like, does the shutter vibrate in a worse way in terms of affecting absolute sharpness if the shutter speed is too high or too low or something?

Oh and, my camera is a Pentax K-x btw, in case camera model comes into play at all in terms of answering this question.

Thanks.

 

[fotobert]

you forgot to turn off the SR!

either use a shutter speed you would use w/o tripod or - if possible - a time longer than 1/4 s because the vibration of the first shutter curtain is no longer visible in the picture. But the effect of a mirror lockup is stronger than the shutter speed.

Have a look at

http://foto.beitinger.de/vergleich_d70_d200/spiegelschlag.html

there a detailed comparison of the effect of mirror lockup and a Manfrotto vs. a cheap tripod with different shutter speeds.

Mirror lockup is "Spiegelvorauslösung"
keine Spiegelvorauslösung means not mirror lockup
Stativ is tripod
Billigstativ is cheap tripod

hope it help you to get some razor sharp pictures
Albert

 

[Infrabasse]

Even a 30s exposure can grant you absolute sharpness if your subject is absolutely still.

Smaller apertures maximize depth of field but they also force you to extend exposure time.

Everything is linked and ultimately it all depends on your subject.

I guess a longer exposure will minimise the brief effect of the shutter vibration.

 

[pentaxfun]

No, I mean, don't get me wrong, I understand the relationship between the 3 exposure factors (shutter speed, aperture, and ISO), and how they affects the overall exposure value of the picture, and how when one goes up or down you have to adjust one of the other ones (or both, if you want to), to account for it, in order to keep the exposure value the same. I know about all that (I shoot like 99% of my photos on full Manual mode on my DSLR). And I know about how a wider aperture will get a shallower depth of field, and a smaller aperture will get a deeper depth of field, and that a higher ISO will increase noise, and than a longer shutter speed allows you to get motion-blur if things are moving in the photo, and a super quick shutter speed allows you to totally freeze a moving object, etc etc.

That's not what I was asking about though. I just meant like, I've seen people make references every now and then on here when talking about getting a tripod image as sharp as possible, and doing all the various factors involved in maximizing sharpness (lock mirror up, use I.R. remote, use sharpest lens at its sharpest focal length and aperture, turn s.r. off, etc etc), I noticed that in addition to this they would sometimes say something like "and use a shutter speed of either faster than x, or slower than x, but not inbetween". Presumably, the idea being, if the shutter speed is either fast enough to outpace the vibration of the opening-thud of the shutter, or slow enough to be long enough to outlive the initial vibration of the shutter, then, it'll maximize the sharpness of the shot even that much more. However, I wasn't sure where the "cutoffs" were, in terms of what the shutter speed range to avoid is, and where the sharpest ones begin, on either side of that range. And also, whether there is a second cutoff once the shutter speed is too extreme, like 1/4,000 or something, if the motor has to slam it too hard to do such a fast shutter speed and thus outweighs the benefit of it outpacing the vibration, or something. Sigh, it's hard for me to explain what I mean when I'm writing this as an internet post, this would be easier if I was talking with you guys verbally lol, then I could explain what my question is much more clearly.

Hopefully someone here will know what I am trying to ask though, even if I didn't explain the question all that well.

 

[Wheatfield]

It's not unusual for camera bodies to display some resonances at certain shutter speeds. I've found Pentax to be problematic (this is painting with a very broad brush) between 1/8 second and 1/30 second, and so I tend to avoid this range of shutter speeds when I am shooting off a tripod.

 

[miles green]

With the K5, 2-second mlu and a heavy tripod (gitzo series 3 + arca-swiss B1), I have not noticed any shake due to the shutter.

With the Pentax 67, which has a curtain 6 times the size, and a bad reputation for shutter-induced shake, I avoided anything between 2 seconds and 1/60th of a second, with a normal lens.

Here's a study with cameras that have an electronic first shutter (Canon 7D, 5DII)

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=4 . This avoid the "problem" alltogether. But the problem is really not that big.

My take is that with a beefy tripod, and the precautions you mention, you don't need to worry about it. Maybe extreme macro and extreme telephoto users can see a difference.... But you're more likely to use flash for macro and high shutter speeds to freeze action with long lens...

Don't let your camera strap flap in the wind!

--
-----------------------------------------------
Miles Green
Corfu

 

[Holger Bargen]

I have some experience with shutter speed and sharpness. I had to do HDR photography with limited light and a 200mm lens (corrected for APS-C: 300mm).

I had to reduce each source of vibration (stable fixing of the object, Berlebach tripod of nearly the best class they build, Manfrotto gearhead, mirror in locke position (Live view at my K5) - and I could not find any relation between shutter speed and sharpness. If I had to take photos of dark objects, I hda often a sum of all three photos during the HDR process of nearly two seconds or even more. There were other factors that were important for sharpness. If there is any disturbance - a car driving on a street 50 m away or someone walking nearby - you get problems. Important for the sharpness and especially the resolution oft your lens ist the aperture you use. Each specific lens has it's optimum regarding this item. Maybe you need a little bit more DOF than at a maximum opened aperture or your lens has it's optimum not at the wdiest open position. I made tests with the 60-250mm lens (which is not the sharpest lens out there) and results were good upt to f=8.0. Above 8.0 (e.g. f=11.0) you will lose some resolution oft the lens. I know that there are lenses out there with maximum resolution at the widest aperture. In general we can say that you should not close the aperture too much to get sharp photos with high resolution. If your system is good buffered against vibration, shutter speed is of minor interest for sharpness.

Best regards
Holger

 

[leopold]

Good solid tripod, good lens,low ISO, around f/8-11 (depends on the lens but i use the aperture i need) 2 sec. delay with mirror Lock-up and cable release (SR turn OFF anyway when you use MLU).

Precise focus, i prefer to use MF instead of AF.

It's the technic i use when i'm not shooting wildlife even if i use that technic sometimes even for wildlife.
--
Leopold
Pentax forever
http://smarcoux.zenfolio.com/
http://www.limagier-photo.com/
http://www.firstlight.com/galleries.php

 

[pentaxfun]

Thanks, this was helpful for me. I will try to take all of the other factors you mentioned into account. And then, once I have everything else down pat, I guess I'll see if there are any shutter speeds that have a negative effect at all, with my pentax K-x. Hopefully there aren't, but, at least if there are, I'll know it is really the shutter speed, and not some other factor I overlooked that was the true cause, making me mistake the culprit as shutter speed being in the "bad-range" when it was actually something else causing it.

I have some experience with shutter speed and sharpness. I had to do HDR photography with limited light and a 200mm lens (corrected for APS-C: 300mm).

I had to reduce each source of vibration (stable fixing of the object, Berlebach tripod of nearly the best class they build, Manfrotto gearhead, mirror in locke position (Live view at my K5) - and I could not find any relation between shutter speed and sharpness. If I had to take photos of dark objects, I hda often a sum of all three photos during the HDR process of nearly two seconds or even more. There were other factors that were important for sharpness. If there is any disturbance - a car driving on a street 50 m away or someone walking nearby - you get problems. Important for the sharpness and especially the resolution oft your lens ist the aperture you use. Each specific lens has it's optimum regarding this item. Maybe you need a little bit more DOF than at a maximum opened aperture or your lens has it's optimum not at the wdiest open position. I made tests with the 60-250mm lens (which is not the sharpest lens out there) and results were good upt to f=8.0. Above 8.0 (e.g. f=11.0) you will lose some resolution oft the lens. I know that there are lenses out there with maximum resolution at the widest aperture. In general we can say that you should not close the aperture too much to get sharp photos with high resolution. If your system is good buffered against vibration, shutter speed is of minor interest for sharpness.

Best regards
Holger

 

[Carlos U]

I remember an article in Modern Photography way back in the eighties, where the author attached a spotting scope to a top of the line SLR (Canon F1, if I remember right). The field of view was equivalent to a 3000mm plus telephoto. He took various test shots at different settings. All were done from a tripod, of course, with and without mirror luck-up, at fast and slow shutter speeds.

The ultra high magnification made evident even the slightest presence of shake or vibration. The shots were sharper when MLU was used, but even then, there was a hint of blurriness produced by the shutter itself. The sharpest shots where done using a slow shutter speed of various seconds, putting a black cardboard in front of the lens and removing the cardboard some seconds after releasing the shutter. The correct exposure was a matter of trial and error.

--
Saludos,
Carlos.

 

[pentaxfun]

Lol, the cardboard trick is amusing but it actually makes sense. Sounds like a cool article.

I remember an article in Modern Photography way back in the eighties, where the author attached a spotting scope to a top of the line SLR (Canon F1, if I remember right). The field of view was equivalent to a 3000mm plus telephoto. He took various test shots at different settings. All were done from a tripod, of course, with and without mirror luck-up, at fast and slow shutter speeds.

The ultra high magnification made evident even the slightest presence of shake or vibration. The shots were sharper when MLU was used, but even then, there was a hint of blurriness produced by the shutter itself. The sharpest shots where done using a slow shutter speed of various seconds, putting a black cardboard in front of the lens and removing the cardboard some seconds after releasing the shutter. The correct exposure was a matter of trial and error.

--
Saludos,
Carlos.

 

[Wheatfield]

Lol, the cardboard trick is amusing but it actually makes sense. Sounds like a cool article.

The "cardboard trick" was invented when lenses often came without shutters and camera bodies took film that measured in inches rather than millimeters. It was called "French Flagging"

 

[fotobert]

...and take a closer look on Berlebach tripods:

http://www.berlebach.de/?sprache=english

These tripods are made of birch wood. Wonderfully built, high vibration damping. Look a little bit old-fashioned, but you will shurely have some tech-talk with other photographers where ever you are seen with it.

Have a nice day
Albert

 

[KentG]

The "cardboard in front of the camera" technique is what we used in the olden days in astrophotography to eliminate all the vibration when we wanted the shot. Many cameras we used in those days had no MLU anyway. and exposures below 1 second were not common except for the moon.
Kent Gittings

 

[KentG]

In the early days of plate cameras the lens cap WAS the shutter. I don't quite go back that far myself.
Kent Gittings

 

[Russ Houston]

SR is automatically disabled with mirror lockup (i.e. the timer).

To the OP, I'd assume the fastest shutter speed (1/4000s) is sharpest, assuming you can maintain the sharpest aperture and lowest ISO.
--
Russ
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rfortson/
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/russfortson
Even bad photography can be fun