Shutter speed vs focal length ratio
- Thread starter Dave_W
- Start date
Blade Canyon
Senior Member
The old film rule was 1/focal length, as Blacktop said (1/200th for 200mm), but DSLRs are getting so sharp I've seen a pro photographer suggest 1/3xfocal length, so 1/600th of a second for 200mm (FX).
The Nikon D800 and the Holy Trinity of Lenses by Valerio Trigari | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS
The Nikon D800 and the Holy Trinity of Lenses by Valerio Trigari | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
This is one of those rules where there is absolutely no difference between FX and DX. Think about it - DX is just the center 44% of the FX sensor, so why would it need a faster shutter speed? The difference is effective focal length, not actual focal length.
And yes, Dave, it's 1/focal length as a minimum. That said, as the pixel density increases you may need to ramp that up some as you go longer. I'm hearing guys saying things like on the D800/810 they need to go 1/(2-or-3 x focal length).
Ok, I just read the other day here about the DX rule. I forgot who it was that posted it. I stand corrected then. Thanks
It also depends on your steady hands. Me, I need at least 1/1000th of a second for a 100mm length.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
The old rule is definitely for film, and I've found that it hold up with the D600/610. I suspect that when you get past 16MP's on a DX sensor you may be running into the 1/(2xFL) condition. I find that if I'm using Auto ISO I'll generally set the Auto setting to one click towards the Faster side to make sure that it allows for one shutter speed faster than normal (i.e. if I'm at 50mm it will give me 1/60 by default, and 1/125 at 1 click faster and 1/250 at 2 clicks faster. I'll adjust that parameter based on subject and lighting.
Remember that this is a rule of thumb, so it gives you only a general idea. I found I can push this limit to slower shutter speeds, in particular with the help of image stabilisation. But this is very individual: I have training in archery and I can hold the camera very still for a few seconds and I've learned to press the shutter button very gently, without shaking the camera. This picture was taken handheld at 29 mm using 1/4 s shutter speed, while the rule of thumb would tell me not to go below 1/30 s. If I remember correctly, I crouched and locked my elbow against my legs for extra stability.
Image stabilisation can increase available shutter speeds perhaps by factor four, but again, a lot depends on the photographer.
Image stabilisation can increase available shutter speeds perhaps by factor four, but again, a lot depends on the photographer.
I don't use my 70-200mm handheld because of its weight, but when I use my 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6, the 'Active' VR works better for me than 'Normal.' I have chronic forearm tendonitis so it is especially difficult to hold the camera steady. The 'Active' VR gives me much sharper photos than 'Normal' VR. 'Active' VR is supposed to be for gross movements, and while I'm not overly shaky, it does work better.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
VR-I or VR-II?
Surprisingly, it's the VRII. Maybe I'm a little spoiled by the 300mm, which I think may have a more powerful VR mechanism than the 70-200mm. Or maybe I'm just not used to the nuances of my new lens? I took some shots this afternoon of a Clark's Nutcracker that came out awesome so perhaps I'm just imagining things....?