Any reason NOT to use faster than 1/640th

bigrob

bigrob

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,225
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
It has been recommended (Jamesb for one) to use 1/640th when shooting sports (football, rugger etc).

Now I presume he is giving that as a minimum to stop the action.

Is there a reason NOT to go for 1/640 if you can get it?

I am thinking that if I can get 1/1250 or higher @F2.8 as an example with a low ISO surely that would reduce the chance of blur due to camera/lens movement.

Right / wrong?
 
no reason at all, but why not use 1/640 @ f4 and give yourself a little leeway on the depth of field for focus being as if they are fast moving, there is a chance that the chosen point will have moved fractionally?

Basically it comes down to light conditions, you may, especially over winter, need to get your ISO very high even to get 1/640 and depending on your camera, you may need to drop down to a slow shutter speed and pick your moments carefully....its all about practice, experience and getting to know what you can and can't get away with.
 
Studio flash duration for the sort of head I use is 1/800 to 1/1200

DSC_6395.jpg

I would say the flowers are moving much slower than a ball
 
Off topic I know (sorry OP) but I love the expression on the blonde's face to the right of that shot Richard! :lol:
 
bigrob said:
It has been recommended (Jamesb for one) to use 1/640th when shooting sports (football, rugger etc).

Now I presume he is giving that as a minimum to stop the action.

Is there a reason NOT to go for 1/640 if you can get it?

I am thinking that if I can get 1/1250 or higher @F2.8 as an example with a low ISO surely that would reduce the chance of blur due to camera/lens movement.

Right / wrong?
Click to expand...

Get the fastest shutter you can.. lots of people give different shutter speeds... 640 is ...odd to say the least... you cant have a catch all for sports shutter for sports... my shutter was going up to 8000 on saturday at f2.8 and iso 200
 
Moochos gracias Kipax
 
KIPAX said:
Get the fastest shutter you can.. lots of people give different shutter speeds... 640 is ...odd to say the least... you cant have a catch all for sports shutter for sports... my shutter was going up to 8000 on saturday at f2.8 and iso 200
Click to expand...

That makes sense to me
 
bigrob said:
Moochos gracias Kipax
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have explained in the tutorial...I suggested 1/640 as a minimum for football/rugby. Certainly if you were shooting in less than brilliant lighting, you'd not want to go any lower than that, up the ISO to get that speed.

When the days are light and sunny, I'll quite often go up to 1/1250 or higher.

I generally stick at f/2.8 to get appropriate separation of subjects but it is OK for f/4. That's probably the smallest I'd go.

Cricket on the other hand is a minimum of 1/1250 and f/5.6 to ensure good sharpness of the batsman if he moves at all...as Tony says, there's no catch all settings. The tutorial I put up is very good for basics and getting started, rules are there to be bent if not broken entirely! Give it a try with something different...perhaps slow the shutter speed right down and get some motion blur and/or panning. Never be afraid to try something different.
 
jamesb84 said:
Perhaps I should have explained in the tutorial...I suggested 1/640 as a minimum for football/rugby. Certainly if you were shooting in less than brilliant lighting, you'd not want to go any lower than that, up the ISO to get that speed..
Click to expand...

So why 640?

Lets say your in a poorly lit football ground and the best you can get at iso 3200 f2.8 is 320 shutter on a 70-200 .. thats half your reccomended and it works.. I dont mean just for the odd lucky shot.. it works

I ahve shot whole games using a 300 lens at f2.8 and a shutter of 320.. not through choice but because the lighting wont let me go higher.. In fact most of my night matches on my website are around thos speeds.. it works..

i wouldnt like to try that using a 400mm but on a 135 or a 200 or even a 300 theres nothing wrong wiht slower shutter speed if your forced into it.
 
KIPAX said:
So why 640?

Lets say your in a poorly lit football ground and the best you can get at iso 3200 f2.8 is 320 shutter on a 70-200 .. thats half your reccomended and it works.. I dont mean just for the odd lucky shot.. it works

I ahve shot whole games using a 300 lens at f2.8 and a shutter of 320.. not through choice but because the lighting wont let me go higher.. In fact most of my night matches on my website are around thos speeds.. it works..

i wouldnt like to try that using a 400mm but on a 135 or a 200 or even a 300 theres nothing wrong wiht slower shutter speed if your forced into it.
Click to expand...

You've answered your own question there though Tony ;) :D

If you can roughly match the focal length to a shutter speed then you're pretty much assured of getting no blur. I have no idea what the scientific reasoning is behind that, but by trial and error that's what I've found!

On the 400mm I've always gone for focal length matched (ie. 1/400) plus a lucky 2/3 stops higher (ie. 1/640). If I'm really pushed for lighting, then I'll drop to 1/500. Scientific aren't I ?! :cool::bonk:
 
I go for the fastest shutter speed I can get without having ruinously high ISO. I tend not to drop below 1/640th if I can help it, but I'm happy to be up at 1/4000th if it's a bright sunny day. I also keep the aperture as wide as possible, though for shooting long things like horses I'll use f/4 at the widest.
 
jamesb84 said:
You've answered your own question there though Tony ;) :D

If you can roughly match the focal length to a shutter speed then you're pretty much assured of getting no blur. I have no idea what the scientific reasoning is behind that, but by trial and error that's what I've found!

On the 400mm I've always gone for focal length matched (ie. 1/400) plus a lucky 2/3 stops higher (ie. 1/640). If I'm really pushed for lighting, then I'll drop to 1/500. Scientific aren't I ?! :cool::bonk:
Click to expand...

Dont forget with the focal length to a shutter speed equation to add on the effect of the crop in the camera, ie the focal length of a Canon 1D with a 400mm lens to shutter speed isn't 1/400th but 1/520th
 
jamesb84 said:
On the 400mm I've always gone for focal length matched (ie. 1/400) plus a lucky 2/3 stops higher (ie. 1/640). If I'm really pushed for lighting, then I'll drop to 1/500. Scientific aren't I ?! :cool::bonk:
Click to expand...

So your advice of a min 640 shutter for sports was based on using a 400mm lens? I cant see that anywhere in this thread hence why i queried it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top