Do you need a tripod for sunsets?

Magnum

Magnum

Suspended / Banned
Messages
297
Edit My Images
Yes
I was thinking of going out over the lake for a sunset ipc, but i don't have a tripod.
With the low light will i still be able to get a decent sunset pic without a tripod or would i be wasting my time?
 
depends on focal length, how much of the sun will be in the pic, how much foreground etc.

If you are using a 10-20mm at 10mm you can get away with a 1/15 second shutter speed, but if you are doing 300mm then you really need 1/400
 
Magnum said:
I was thinking of going out over the lake for a sunset ipc, but i don't have a tripod.
With the low light will i still be able to get a decent sunset pic without a tripod or would i be wasting my time?
Click to expand...

i'm no expert,but i would say it's damned near impossible to hold the camera steady enough to take a shot of the sun setting where exposure times will be anything from a few secs up to ????.perhaps you could borrow one from a friend or summat...;)

also it might be worth checking out the for sale section on here for a cheap bargain if funds are tight :shrug:
 
stan the man said:
i'm no expert,but i would say it's damned near impossible to hold the camera steady enough to take a shot of the sun setting where exposure times will be anything from a few secs up to ????.perhaps you could borrow one from a friend or summat...;)

also it might be worth checking out the for sale section on here for a cheap bargain if funds are tight :shrug:
Click to expand...

No one i know is into photography :(

I suppose it will have to wait for now. I might have some money left after payday.
 
I have handheld a few sunsets, but recenlty when doing my long exposure stuff, Check the landscape gallery for my photos i have used a tripod as some of my exposures have been 30sec
 
Yes and no.

Some of my more recent stuff was done without a 'pod, but as said, it depends what you're wanting really... If you want silhouettey kind of stuff, then you're exposing off of the sky/sun, which is plenty bright enough for you to get a decent shutter speed. You'll have to get out AS the sun is setting, or just after it's dipped below the horizon. Use the camera's metering, see what happens :)

If you want slow motion (waves, for example) then you're going to need a tripod, or a hard surface on which you can put the camera steadily.

I'd say use what you've got and go get some shots of the sun setting with a lovely silhouetted foreground, and get a tripod later down the line :)

All you'll waste is an evening, and it won't be a total waste, as you'll have learnt what not to do next time :thumbs:
 
no matter what timem length exposure and mm focal length always always use a tripod, to me it gets into habit and is a good one to be in, it slows you down makes you look and stops the "tourist shot" as i call it.

doesnt mean you have to use tripod but it adds that crispness to any shot of a slower exposure.

just my opinion though, woudlnt go anywhere without out one.
 
mattyh said:
Yes and no.

Some of my more recent stuff was done without a 'pod, but as said, it depends what you're wanting really... If you want silhouettey kind of stuff, then you're exposing off of the sky/sun, which is plenty bright enough for you to get a decent shutter speed. You'll have to get out AS the sun is setting, or just after it's dipped below the horizon. Use the camera's metering, see what happens :)

If you want slow motion (waves, for example) then you're going to need a tripod, or a hard surface on which you can put the camera steadily.

I'd say use what you've got and go get some shots of the sun setting with a lovely silhouetted foreground, and get a tripod later down the line :)

All you'll waste is an evening, and it won't be a total waste, as you'll have learnt what not to do next time :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I think i'll give it a try. I'll use a lot of exposure compensation and then edit the raw file and see what i get.
 
It will probably be difficult at 28-50mm without VR. (This is one of the times that VR is better than speed.) However bits are cheap. :) Try to find somewhere to rest the camera and use the timer. If that's not possible then stick the camera in continuous mode and fire a off a string of shots, chances are one will be sharp.
 
You don't need a tripod to give it a go, a handy fence post or a rock can do as well, make yourself a beanbag if you want.
 
I have to suggest you get a tripod and use it for almost all your landscape shots, regardless of shutter speed or focal length.

There are a variety of reasons why, but the bottom line is that getting a tripod I actually used led to a big improvement in my pictures. I now need a good reason *not* to use a tripod.
 
I think there is some disagreement here! Personally I rarely use a tripod, because I find them too cumbersome and slow. I like to be able to quickly change position, and am happy shooting down to about 1/30sec. I don't think you need to spend a fortune on a tripod for landscapes - a cheap one will do as long as it has leg braces - unless you're using a medium format film or full frame DSLR.
 
The advice ive seen is to NOT get a cheap tripod. I would pay up to £100 for one.
 
Magnum said:
The advice ive seen is to NOT get a cheap tripod. I would pay up to £100 for one.
Click to expand...

Thats because the head you put on the tripod is actually more important than the tripod itself, and cheap tripods usually come with cheaper heads that are horrible to work with, hence you don't bother.
At the £100~ish range you start to get nice heads that make using the tripod - fun isn't the right word - convenient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top