Question for rangefinder users

How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).


Are there any samples on the net?


Patrick

"Peter Irwin" wrote in message
...
Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod
or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

If I'm well rested, 1/10th second with a Kiev rangefinder.
On a camera with modern speeds: 1/16th. with 50mm lens.

On candid shots taken with available light, subject motion
is nearly always a bigger problem than camera shake if you
have steady hands. Holding a camera really still while
pressing the shutter release is an art you can learn. I was
really rotten at it when I first got back into photography
three years ago. I practiced a lot and got quite a bit better.

Pictures of landscapes, room interiors and other inanimate
things look bad when they are even slightly unsharp while
pictures of people don't seem to be as critical especially
if the major source of unsharpness is their own motion.

If you are taking interior shots where tripods are not
allowed, you can often get away with holding a mini-tripod
against a wall.

Peter.
--





This is for weddiing ceremonies, where people are fairly stationary (except
for the procession, and I will be using flash for that), where flash is not
allowed after the ceremony begins.

I am asking this because I would like not to use a tripod, since they are a
PITA, in my opinion. I just bought a Canonet G III 17, which as the
F/1.7 40mm lens. Also nice is that it has a leaf shutter, very quiet, I'm
told. I can use it for outdoor fill flash with wide apertures, as well.

and I'm hoping I can handhold this baby at 1/30 or 1/15 sec, this will
allow me to shoot in low light situations (on primarily stationary subjects,
which is all I really need it for).

I can't see spending thousands on a Leica when I need this camera for a very
specific application, and so, I'm hoping the $175 Canonet will serve this
purpose.

I was using my Olympus E1 on a tripod, but moving around the church with a
tripod is such a drag.


Patrick

"Peter Irwin" wrote in message
...
Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod
or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

If I'm well rested, 1/10th second with a Kiev rangefinder.
On a camera with modern speeds: 1/16th. with 50mm lens.

On candid shots taken with available light, subject motion
is nearly always a bigger problem than camera shake if you
have steady hands. Holding a camera really still while
pressing the shutter release is an art you can learn. I was
really rotten at it when I first got back into photography
three years ago. I practiced a lot and got quite a bit better.

Pictures of landscapes, room interiors and other inanimate
things look bad when they are even slightly unsharp while
pictures of people don't seem to be as critical especially
if the major source of unsharpness is their own motion.

If you are taking interior shots where tripods are not
allowed, you can often get away with holding a mini-tripod
against a wall.

Peter.
--





This is for weddiing ceremonies, where people are fairly stationary (except
for the procession, and I will be using flash for that), where flash is not
allowed after the ceremony begins.

I am asking this because I would like not to use a tripod, since they are a
PITA, in my opinion. I just bought a Canonet G III 17, which as the
F/1.7 40mm lens. Also nice is that it has a leaf shutter, very quiet, I'm
told. I can use it for outdoor fill flash with wide apertures, as well.

and I'm hoping I can handhold this baby at 1/30 or 1/15 sec, this will
allow me to shoot in low light situations (on primarily stationary subjects,
which is all I really need it for).

I can't see spending thousands on a Leica when I need this camera for a very
specific application, and so, I'm hoping the $175 Canonet will serve this
purpose.

I was using my Olympus E1 on a tripod, but moving around the church with a
tripod is such a drag.


Patrick

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:19:05 -0500, "Patrick L."
wrote:



How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

I've handheld shots at 1/30th with good results. I've even gotten
acceptable (but very few) at 1/15th.


Colyn Goodson

http://home.swbell.net/colyng

http://www.colyngoodson.com

Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

If I'm well rested, 1/10th second with a Kiev rangefinder.
On a camera with modern speeds: 1/16th. with 50mm lens.

On candid shots taken with available light, subject motion
is nearly always a bigger problem than camera shake if you
have steady hands. Holding a camera really still while
pressing the shutter release is an art you can learn. I was
really rotten at it when I first got back into photography
three years ago. I practiced a lot and got quite a bit better.

Pictures of landscapes, room interiors and other inanimate
things look bad when they are even slightly unsharp while
pictures of people don't seem to be as critical especially
if the major source of unsharpness is their own motion.

If you are taking interior shots where tripods are not
allowed, you can often get away with holding a mini-tripod
against a wall.

Peter.
--

Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

If I'm well rested, 1/10th second with a Kiev rangefinder.
On a camera with modern speeds: 1/16th. with 50mm lens.

On candid shots taken with available light, subject motion
is nearly always a bigger problem than camera shake if you
have steady hands. Holding a camera really still while
pressing the shutter release is an art you can learn. I was
really rotten at it when I first got back into photography
three years ago. I practiced a lot and got quite a bit better.

Pictures of landscapes, room interiors and other inanimate
things look bad when they are even slightly unsharp while
pictures of people don't seem to be as critical especially
if the major source of unsharpness is their own motion.

If you are taking interior shots where tripods are not
allowed, you can often get away with holding a mini-tripod
against a wall.

Peter.
--

In article ,
Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

I've had *sharp* A4 results from 1/30 with a 35mm lens on a rangefinder.
That's only one or two frame I've tried that with. Can get consistently
sharp results with a 90mm lens and 1/60. Much better than I can with an SLR.

"Patrick L." wrote in message
...

"Peter Irwin" wrote in message
...
Patrick L. wrote:


How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod
or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor
sharp,
just usable).

If I'm well rested, 1/10th second with a Kiev rangefinder.
On a camera with modern speeds: 1/16th. with 50mm lens.

On candid shots taken with available light, subject motion
is nearly always a bigger problem than camera shake if you
have steady hands. Holding a camera really still while
pressing the shutter release is an art you can learn. I was
really rotten at it when I first got back into photography
three years ago. I practiced a lot and got quite a bit better.

Pictures of landscapes, room interiors and other inanimate
things look bad when they are even slightly unsharp while
pictures of people don't seem to be as critical especially
if the major source of unsharpness is their own motion.

If you are taking interior shots where tripods are not
allowed, you can often get away with holding a mini-tripod
against a wall.

Peter.
--





This is for weddiing ceremonies, where people are fairly stationary
(except
for the procession, and I will be using flash for that), where flash is
not
allowed after the ceremony begins.

I am asking this because I would like not to use a tripod, since they are
a
PITA, in my opinion. I just bought a Canonet G III 17, which as the
F/1.7 40mm lens. Also nice is that it has a leaf shutter, very quiet,
I'm
told. I can use it for outdoor fill flash with wide apertures, as
well.

and I'm hoping I can handhold this baby at 1/30 or 1/15 sec, this will
allow me to shoot in low light situations (on primarily stationary
subjects,
which is all I really need it for).

I can't see spending thousands on a Leica when I need this camera for a
very
specific application, and so, I'm hoping the $175 Canonet will serve this
purpose.

I was using my Olympus E1 on a tripod, but moving around the church with
a
tripod is such a drag.


Patrick


I'd be very surprised if you can't do acceptable shots at 1/30s - if
necessary, practice. 1/60s or even 1/125s is certainly a better 'target'
speed to eliminate (more or less) visible shake, but 1/30s should look fine,
especially at the sort of maximum enlargements wedding pic.s will see.

I reckon on 1/30s being no problem, especially with a rangefinder with leaf
shutter. 1/15s is usually OK, and so is 1/8s if I am careful and not
looking for much enlargement - no, I don't choose to do it, but if it is
that or no shot, I shoot away and know most of them will be fine.


Peter

Patrick L. wrote:


This is for wedding ceremonies, where people are fairly stationary (except
for the procession, and I will be using flash for that), where flash is not
allowed after the ceremony begins.

Weddings are funny things. I'd want to make sure that everyone
involved was reasonable before going near a wedding with a
camera.

I am asking this because I would like not to use a tripod, since they are a
PITA, in my opinion. I just bought a Canonet G III 17, which as the
F/1.7 40mm lens. Also nice is that it has a leaf shutter, very quiet, I'm
told. I can use it for outdoor fill flash with wide apertures, as well.

and I'm hoping I can handhold this baby at 1/30 or 1/15 sec, this will
allow me to shoot in low light situations (on primarily stationary subjects,
which is all I really need it for).

I've got a Konica Auto S2, which is probably not wildly unlike
your camera. It is pretty quiet, and it is possible to get
decently sharp pictures at 1/15th of a second. You will need
to practice in order to get good at holding the camera
really still. One big advantage of a rangefinder is that
you can see through the viewfinder during the exposure and
know whether or not you have a sharp picture.

There are two major types of camera shake. One is caused by
moving the camera when you press the shutter release, the
other is general unsteadiness. You can do quite a bit of
practicing without film in the camera. Look through the viewfinder
while releasing the shutter. It helps if you can line up a small
mark on the wall with the edge of the rangefinder patch: it should
be easy to spot a very small amount of camera movement. When you
can release the shutter without the slightest visible movement
of the mark on the wall seen through the viewfinder, you are
ready to practice with film.

General unsteadiness is reduced by bracing the camera against
your face and bracing your arms against your body. It can help
to hold your elbows against your chest. If you can lean your
body against a chair, a wall or a pillar, that can help too.

The church may be darker than you think. If you can practice
in the church where the wedding will be held, you can get a
really good idea what is required and how fast a film you will
need.

I can't see spending thousands on a Leica when I need this camera for a very
specific application, and so, I'm hoping the $175 Canonet will serve this
purpose.

The Canonet should be fine. $175 seems like a lot to pay. For that kind
of money I would want someone to have done a really superb CLA on it.

Peter.
--

"Roger" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:19:05 -0500, "Patrick L."
wrote:

How slow of a shutter speed have you been able to use without a tripod or
monopod, and still get a viable shot? (Doesn't have to be razor sharp,
just usable).

Are there any samples on the net?

Patrick


[SNIP]

It's really good to baseline your expectations by taking a tripod out
sometime and just seeing what the world looks like at speeds between 1
second and 1/60 second. Subject blur becomes very noticeable at about
1/30 second - especially hand motions and worse head motions.

Good advice!

My favorite accessory is a bogen table top tripod that I use pressed
against the wall for night shots, etc.

I have one of those too, and it is very good. I also have the tiny Minox
tripod: this comes apart and, with its included cable release, packs down to
little more than the size of a fountain pen. It is expensive, but does mean
I can have a tripod with me just about all the time - it struggles with the
weight of an SLR (when the Manfrotto/Bogen one is better) but is fine with
my rangefinders. Very useful.

The Really Right Stuff BTT bracket is a useful add-on for taking verticals
with either of these.



Peter