Hand held rule - do we multiply focal length by 1.5

Newer members often state that they think their question is too basic, or stupid, or whatever, to be posted. Nothing could be further further from the truth in any section at DSLRUsers.com, but especially here. Don't feel intimidated. The only stupid question is the one that remains unasked. We were all beginners at one stage, and even the most experienced amongst us will admit to learning new stuff on a daily basis. Ask away! Please also refer to the forum rules and the portal page

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

Hand held rule - do we multiply focal length by 1.5

Postby stubbsy on Tue Feb 08, 2005 2:43 pm

Ok. I'm confused (not hard really) :shock:

I've just read Matt K's new pdf on shutter speed assignment (linked to from the index page - and very good it is too!) and, to summarise, it says when shooting hand held with the D70 that the simple rule for hand held is that the shutter speed should be 1/focal length * 1.5 (the 1.5 allowing for the difference between 35mm film and the smaller CCD in the D70) so a 200 mm lens should have a shutter speed of 1/200*1.5 or 1/300th second

Elsewhere here I seem to recall reading that youd DIDN'T multiply by 1.5 for this (I think Gary said this, but don't quote me). The latter makes more sense to me since the shutter speed is to "cancel" shake which becomes more exaggerated the further away your target and I can't see how the size of the sensor would make any difference to the amount of relative shake.

If this wasn't written by someone as knowledgable as Matt I'd say he's just plain wrong, but I figure he isn't based on past experience so can someone please enlighten me.

TIA
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby pippin88 on Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:19 pm

I follow your logic, it's a crop factor not a focal length factor.

Besides from personal experience, I get sharp images at 1/focal length (or slower) just fine.
User avatar
pippin88
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:42 pm
Location: Newcastle / Sydney

Postby Greg B on Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:44 pm

The muliplier has its effect in the field of view, that is to say that the area you can see through a 200mm lens on a d70 is the same as you would see through a 300mm lens on a 35mm camera.

The 1/focal length as minimum shutter speed idea is really just a guide. Some people can shoot slower shutter speeds, some may find that even this as a minimum is still too slow to get a sharp image.

I agree with Matt - I would also use the "multiplied" focal length to estimate what would be the minimum shutter speed for sharpness, after all the issue is the degree to which a given amount of movement in the camera is magnified at the subject. However it will vary between people, so just treat it as a rough starting point.
Greg - - - - D200 etc

Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.
- Arthur Schopenhauer
User avatar
Greg B
Moderator
 
Posts: 5938
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 7:14 pm
Location: Surrey Hills, Melbourne

Postby Matt. K on Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:07 pm

The reason I advocate this is because to make a print....the D70 image would have to be enlarged more than a 35mm image. In that sense it needs to be sharper so it would be prudent to go with the 1.5 factor. However, Greg B has put in nicely....these are only guides and individuals may find they can user lower speeds if they use sound camera holding techniques.
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Postby stubbsy on Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:23 pm

Greg B, Matt K

Thanks for your illumination. Matt I see now how this makes sense - didn't think about the printing aspect.
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700


Return to Absolute Beginners Questions