Reading mode: Light Dark

How fast of a shutter speed to eliminate the need for IS in a lens?

Go to last post
The rule of thumb is 1 / 2*fl, so a 200mm lens would be 1/400 or faster to hand hold. Of course, some people are steadier and can hand hold at slower speeds.
Mark in Cleveland said:
If choosing a IS vs Non-IS lens ( f2.8 or 4), how fast of a shutter
speed do you need to maintain to eliminate the "need" for IS?

1/250 or faster or,
1/500 or faster or,
??

Thanks
--
Canon Rebel XSi w/ 17-55 f2.8 IS; 70-300 IS; 100mm f2.8 Macro ;
100-400mm L
IS; 430EX
http://www.flickr.com/photos/galloimages
Mac Enthusiast
Click to expand...
--
Steve
 
See the "Lens Reviews" section to see IS-on and IS-off comparison.
 
ARShutterbug said:
I suggest 1/2000 or faster shutter speed. Of course, a tripod is
much better.
Click to expand...
Suggestions aside, not many of my shots are above or at 1/2000. In reality, unless someone is shooting in a lot of light, 1/2000 is a dream. As far as additional gear like tripod and monopod are concerned, they are good, but come at cost of larger inconvinience - something most people would avoid if they possibly can. In fact, for many people, not many of their shots are taken on a tripod for this very reason. IS, provides a good working alternative many a times if people are willing to look at it

Again, none of the above is necessary, just like taking pictures is not. They are just some options

--
PicPocket
http://pictures.ashish-pragya.com/GalleryIndex.html

 
than 2 times your focal length (include the crop factor in your calculation). So for example, if you are shooting with a 200mm focal length on a 1.6x crop camera (xxxD or xxD series camera), then a shutter speed of 1/640s or faster would negate the need for IS. If you have real steady hands, then 1xFL rule could apply, thus anything faster than 1/320s. Depends on your handholding abilities/techniques.
--
Cheers,

Bryan P.

OneDMark3, FortyD, ASixFiftyIS
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29386469@N00/
http://blplhp.smugmug.com/

The best thing that could poke you in the eye....is your viewfinder.
 
If you were shooting with a 600mm lens then 500 would not be. if you were shooting with a 10mm lens then it would be extreme.

I always use the formula to at the very least match the shutter speed number with the focal length number. .....300mm lens....at least 300th of a second shutter speed.
--
'The moment you think your great is the moment you quit learning.'
http://www.gawalters.com
http://garyw1.smugmug.com/
 
Mark in Cleveland said:
If choosing a IS vs Non-IS lens ( f2.8 or 4), how fast of a shutter
speed do you need to maintain to eliminate the "need" for IS?

1/250 or faster or,
1/500 or faster or,
??
Click to expand...
As for the rule of thumb regarding shutterspeed:
For 35mm cameras this is: 1 / focal length.

For your crop camera it is: 1 / ( focal length * 1.6 )

So if you want the minimum speed for a 200mm lens:
1 / 320 sec.

That's just the rule of thumb though.

I know from experience that I can shoot at slower times than that. But that's a personal thing.

And IS? Still has it's limits regarding minimum shutterspeed!

A 200 mm that the manufacturer claims to have 4 stops gain due to IS is often better used at a 3 stops difference maximum. Stay on the save side! A manufacturer will always say something like: "up to 4 stops" which doesn't translate into "4 stops" although people tend to make that mistake most of the time. Better save than sorry.

So instead of the 1/320 sec you will get 1/40 sec in that case for the 200mm lens.

And remember:

The 1/320 sec of the non-IS 200mm lens freezes alot of subject movement when needed. The 1/40 sec of the IS 200mm lens doesn't. Think before you act. IS is not the answer to everything.
 
Mark in Cleveland said:
It sounds like, in general, 1/500 or faster is the "take home"
message here.
--
Canon Rebel XSi w/ 17-55 f2.8 IS; 70-300 IS; 100mm f2.8 Macro ;
100-400mm L
IS; 430EX
http://www.flickr.com/photos/galloimages
Mac Enthusiast
Click to expand...
If that is the message you are getting, then you are not reading the answers closely enough. It depends on focal length, and the options you presented only apply to long focal lengths (like 300mm). On your 17-55, if you are shooting at 17, you should be able to use 1/30 very easily and not need IS. Now, you won't freeze motion at that speed, but you should not see camera shake either. Even on the long end of that lens at 55mm you should easily be able to use 1/100 without IS. I routinely shoot at various lengths using 1/60 without IS and get sharp results.

As a previous poster mentioned, shooting only at speeds of 1/500 or higher is a dream. There just is not enough light in most situations for this unless you stay outdoors and shoot only very high ISO.

Chris
--
My Blog: http://chris-photo-journey.blogspot.com
My Photographs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisof4
John 3:16 - Yep, I believe.

Chris
 
That would work for a 200 mm lens, but most likely not for a 300mm or longer lens. Depending on the person, of course.

And it's overkill for wide angle to normal lenses.
Mark in Cleveland said:
It sounds like, in general, 1/500 or faster is the "take home"
message here.
Click to expand...
--
Steve
 
chrisof4 said:
Mark in Cleveland said:
It sounds like, in general, 1/500 or faster is the "take home"
message here.
Click to expand...
If that is the message you are getting, then you are not reading the
answers closely enough. It depends on focal length, and the options
you presented only apply to long focal lengths (like 300mm). On your
17-55, if you are shooting at 17, you should be able to use 1/30 very
easily and not need IS. Now, you won't freeze motion at that speed,
but you should not see camera shake either. Even on the long end of
that lens at 55mm you should easily be able to use 1/100 without IS.
I routinely shoot at various lengths using 1/60 without IS and get
sharp results.
Click to expand...
Another thing to keep in mind is subject distance. Part of the reason that 1 / (2*f*crop) is just a "Rule of Thumb" is that subject distance plays a large role as well. Taking a distant landscape at 50mm, you could probably get away with 1/30 or so, but when taking a close up at only a couple feet, even 1/100 might suffer from camera shake if you're not steady.
--
----------
Andrew Melvin Helmboldt

'A wise man talks because he has something to say; a fool talks because he has to say something.' -Plato

 
There are a number of variables, versions of IS and a couple of 'rules of thumb' that have some applicability. The person doing the shooting is one of the big factors. I will always choose IS, if this is an option for the lens, but this works for me and may not work for you.

The best way to determine the suitability of IS to your needs, and its relative value, is to experiment with your 70-300 IS lens. It's easy enough to set up some shots as you would normally shoot, try it with the IS on and off. You might also be surprised what you learn about your own shooting style.

--
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
 
I think you may be asking the wrong question. If you mean "how fast does the shutter speed need to be in a 'normal' lens to 'eliminate' blur from camera shake," there are answers and then there are answers.

The old "rule of thumb" was 1/focal length. This general guideline works differently for different formats - you'll understand why if you think about it for a moment - and it is not exactly a "rule." Some people can hold the camera more still than others, partly as a consequence of technique and partly just due to individual variations in steadiness. (Not to mention how much caffeine you just consumed...)

In addition, the standard itself is relative. How large a print will you make? With traditional smallish prints a small amount of blur will not be very visible, but it may be in a larger print - and today many tend to push print size from small source images. Is it a landscape or a shot of active people in a crowd? In some shots the blur is OK or even part of the attraction of the image, but if you are going for 'Ansel Adams-like' clarity far less blur (essentially none) will be tolerated.

If you have a camera and lens, the best way to figure out where your limits are is to do a bit of experimenting. Once you have this baseline you can answer the second part of your question, e.g. "how much slower can I shoot with IS?" or the converse, "how much faster will I have to shoot without IS" by understanding the specs of the lens.

Dan
Mark in Cleveland said:
If choosing a IS vs Non-IS lens ( f2.8 or 4), how fast of a shutter
speed do you need to maintain to eliminate the "need" for IS?

1/250 or faster or,
1/500 or faster or,
??

Thanks
--
Canon Rebel XSi w/ 17-55 f2.8 IS; 70-300 IS; 100mm f2.8 Macro ;
100-400mm L
IS; 430EX
http://www.flickr.com/photos/galloimages
Mac Enthusiast
Click to expand...
--
---
G Dan Mitchell
SF Bay Area
Blog: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/
Gallery: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/wpg2-3/
 
AMelvin said:
chrisof4 said:
Mark in Cleveland said:
It sounds like, in general, 1/500 or faster is the "take home"
message here.
Click to expand...
If that is the message you are getting, then you are not reading the
answers closely enough. It depends on focal length, and the options
you presented only apply to long focal lengths (like 300mm). On your
17-55, if you are shooting at 17, you should be able to use 1/30 very
easily and not need IS. Now, you won't freeze motion at that speed,
but you should not see camera shake either. Even on the long end of
that lens at 55mm you should easily be able to use 1/100 without IS.
I routinely shoot at various lengths using 1/60 without IS and get
sharp results.
Click to expand...
Another thing to keep in mind is subject distance. Part of the reason
that 1 / (2*f*crop) is just a "Rule of Thumb" is that subject
distance plays a large role as well. Taking a distant landscape at
50mm, you could probably get away with 1/30 or so, but when taking a
close up at only a couple feet, even 1/100 might suffer from camera
shake if you're not steady.
--
----------
Andrew Melvin Helmboldt

'A wise man talks because he has something to say; a fool talks
because he has to say something.' -Plato

Click to expand...
Good point, Andrew. Thanks.

Chris
--
My Blog: http://chris-photo-journey.blogspot.com
My Photographs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisof4
John 3:16 - Yep, I believe.

Chris
 
I'd say that's very individual (focal length, equipment, physiology and technique dependent...) Assuming shooting static objects, some people can bring critically sharp images (i.e. sharpest possible for a given lens/camera combination used on a solid tripod) at 1/60s and some not even at 1/500s. With "normal sized" lenses (say, up to 200mm), I'd say stying at 1/500 or shorter if possible gives good results unless critical sharpness is not your objective (and often it is not.)
 
depends.

if it's simply removing handshake on static subjects 1/focal length is a good rule. consider also your pixel density though - as the pixel density increases so does your shutter speed.

if it's removing subject motion blur - which IS is no help at all to you, then I find atypically 1/200th of a second for normal scenic motion blurr - again, increase the shutter speed as pixel density increases.

I find the 1/focal rule worked well on 6mp sensor bodies, however, with the 40D I find the need to double the rules, because it's higher density.

sharpness and stopping of motion is related really to multiple factors..

1.. the amount of shake YOU introduce.

2.. the amount of motion in your scene to capture

3.. the focal length you are shooting at.

4.. the pixel size and related image print size you wish to view it at.
 
That's not really true. Camera shake will move distant and close images pretty equally on the sensor. The reason you could get away with lower shutter speed for distant subjects is probably they do not have the high sharpness and details to begin with. A little camera shake blur will not make them look significantly worse. However you will still need to use a high enough shutter speed or even tripod if you want to achieve tack sharp details.
AMelvin said:
Another thing to keep in mind is subject distance. Part of the reason
that 1 / (2*f*crop) is just a "Rule of Thumb" is that subject
distance plays a large role as well. Taking a distant landscape at
50mm, you could probably get away with 1/30 or so, but when taking a
close up at only a couple feet, even 1/100 might suffer from camera
shake if you're not steady.
--
----------
Andrew Melvin Helmboldt

'A wise man talks because he has something to say; a fool talks
because he has to say something.' -Plato

Click to expand...
 
I agree as fast as possible and use a tripod if you really want to get the maximum sharpness.
Badbatz said:
I'd say that's very individual (focal length, equipment, physiology
and technique dependent...) Assuming shooting static objects, some
people can bring critically sharp images (i.e. sharpest possible for
a given lens/camera combination used on a solid tripod) at 1/60s and
some not even at 1/500s. With "normal sized" lenses (say, up to
200mm), I'd say stying at 1/500 or shorter if possible gives good
results unless critical sharpness is not your objective (and often it
is not.)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top