D810 handheld shooting? Why is it even an issue?

[Tony Beach]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

Not resolution, pixel density.

I read what you wrote the first time. It's hard to measure camera shake, but measuring subject motion is easier, so imagine a fast moving subject crossing the frame of both cameras at the same speed during an exposure that is long enough to record the subject crossing several pixels; now do the math, the subject will pass 25% more pixels on the 36 MP FX than it will on the 16 MP m4/3 -- so which one is blurrier at the pixel level?

 

[Rick Knepper]

Tripod not needed when you have VR, or when you use a fast enough shutter speed (D610)

--

Exactly...I rarely carry a tripod and do not own (nor have a need to) a VR lens.

Why is this information pertinent to the topic or the OP?

 

[primeshooter]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

 

[stevo23]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

--
http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages

What you are all failing to say is that none of these cameras are "harder to shoot handheld" its all about output size. If you shot a D700 12 MP sensor and printed 12 by 8 and where happy with your results at 1/160 of a second with a 135mm lens and you buy a D800 and shoot it at the same settings same lens and output size...you will see no difference in quality and if you noticed no motion blur in the 12mp file you won't in the 36 (at that output size)! If you happen to print the file at 36 by 24 from the D800 you may see the motion blur that the smaller sensor never revealed, which then means by next time upping the shutter and doing your shot again on the larger MP sensor, you will garner more detail and hopefully eliminate any motion of camera / subject. That is the beauty of a higher MP sensor, you can garner the detail if you want, if you know your output size is small prints you don't need to worry. I myself prefer to attain sharpness down to a 100% crop level as for me, it makes the most sense to extract detail from every scene even if the ISO needs to increase, who cares?

That is true too. But most people on this forum will look for camera shake at 100% magnification.

 

[Tony Beach]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

What you are all failing to say is that none of these cameras are "harder to shoot handheld" its all about output size.

I have no idea why you directed this reply to me.

 

[stevo23]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

Not resolution, pixel density.

I read what you wrote the first time. It's hard to measure camera shake, but measuring subject motion is easier, so imagine a fast moving subject crossing the frame of both cameras at the same speed during an exposure that is long enough to record the subject crossing several pixels; now do the math, the subject will pass 25% more pixels on the 36 MP FX than it will on the 16 MP m4/3 -- so which one is blurrier at the pixel level?

Sorry - yes, in that sense, it's the resolution that you apply to the scene that matters for detecting movement. So if several folks with different cameras frame the same scene...

I was talking perhaps less practically in terms of the ability to detect finer movement. Higher pixel density becomes a challenge in that respect.

 

[Tony Beach]

It always seems like supposition, when it comes to discussing this sort of thing. Obviously, measuring the average person's body movements, the lens resolution, the sensor pixel scene coverage would tell you how fast you need to shoot in order to eliminate all vibration from showing up in an image. Anecdotally, using a tripod can make a difference over hand-held shooting with a 16MP camera, generally negating the old film rule of shooting at a shutter speed that corresponds to 1/lens focal length. So 36MP surely must be very sensitive to any body motion, even with VR and a fast shutter speed.

16Mp M43 will be more difficult to shoot handheld than D810 - pixel density is higher. Look not at the resolution but the pixel density.

Take two photos using the same AOV (obviously different focal lengths) and then compare them. By your logic the 16 MP m4/3 file has more resolution than the 36 MP FX file, but that is demonstrably not the case.

Not resolution, pixel density.

I read what you wrote the first time. It's hard to measure camera shake, but measuring subject motion is easier, so imagine a fast moving subject crossing the frame of both cameras at the same speed during an exposure that is long enough to record the subject crossing several pixels; now do the math, the subject will pass 25% more pixels on the 36 MP FX than it will on the 16 MP m4/3 -- so which one is blurrier at the pixel level?

Sorry - yes, in that sense, it's the resolution that you apply to the scene that matters for detecting movement. So if several folks with different cameras frame the same scene...

I was talking perhaps less practically in terms of the ability to detect finer movement. Higher pixel density becomes a challenge in that respect.

Same focal length on both cameras and the higher pixel density camera will detect more motion blur because the AOV will be smaller, but you put a longer focal length on the larger format so the AOV is the same and then the one with more pixels shows more blur even at the pixel level.