File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
How quick is a 1/4000 sec shutter?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:07:15 14:05:08Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width800Image Height537
>> Anonymous
1/4000th of a second.
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
>>271075

dont be ridiculous, OP the "th" stands for "total hours".

Press the shutter, wait 4000 hours, then you'll have a perfect exposure.
>> SAGE GOES IN EVERY FIELD sage rage
>>271070
faster than a speeding bullet. stronger than a locomotive
>> Anonymous
helpful.
>> sleepingjesus !!EUSvSB1EC8u
>>271087

"Sage rage" is a wonderful turn of phrase. I lol'd
>> Anonymous
EXTREM FAST.
>> Anonymous
>>271122
except you don't pronounce "sage" with the same ending as "phrase"

It's [Sah-Geh]
>> sleepingjesus !!EUSvSB1EC8u
>>271131

I'm well aware, but when I see sage paired with rage I can't help but pronounce it as American as possible.
>> Anonymous
>>271070
very fast. 1/500 of a second will give you distinguishable helicopter blades with blur.
1/1000 will freeze helicopter blades with no blur.
>> Anonymous
it's 1/4000 of a second
>> SAGE GROWS IN EVERY FIELD sage rage
>>271131
sah-geh rah-geh
>> Anonymous
What would you ever need a 1/8000 shutter speed for?
>> Anonymous
>>271159
to freeze EXTREM FAST MOTION
>> Anonymous
>>271159
To shoot with a fast lens wide open in broad sunlight?
>> Anonymous
>>271161
not even then. In bright sunlight the iso would have to be set at 8000 at f/16 to need, 1/8000
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>271196
what part of >wide open did you fail to get. f/1.2 not f/16, none of the pedestrian shit.
>> Anonymous
>>271210
f1.2 is so pedestrian.
>> Anonymous
>>271210
I see your another fuckin' fag who thinks
1) the wide open is the only way to shoot
2) thinks anything small ap is pedestrian

go back to school you piece of shit
and don't assume that I am as stupid and inexperienced as you are:
Here ya go - at 1/8000 you have iso of about 200 for 1.2. Now go study optics a little and study focal plane shutter and find out why that might not be such a good idea
Until them stick you fucking 50mm f/1.2 up your pretentious ass
>> Anonymous
was this photo shot from the WTC?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>271221
Nice butthurt, but prehaps you should explain why you didnt say that in your first post instead of talking about shooting considerably stopped down when everyone else was talking about shooting wide open.
>> Anonymous
>>271221
You're probably trolling but what the fuck? With your logic, you could never get really short DoF in bright sunligt unless you use a long lens at like f/2.8, which would still need a fast shutter speed.
I shoot at f/1.8 quite a lot in bright sunlight. I like the short DoF and I don't need the sharpness of f/5.6 or whatever.
>> Anonymous
>>271221

someone forgot their pills
>> Anonymous
>>271224
indeed
>> Anonymous
>>271236
hi again idiot
first one was to illustrate how ridiculous 1/8000 was

but then you're an idiot what do you know?

>>271256
now you're making about as much sense as that small-dicked turd, Butterfly
>> sage rage
http://photo.net/filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00FCl6
>> Anonymous
>>271131
Yeah, if you're a weeaboo.
>> Anonymous
PROTIP: shooting a clear pic of my cock requires a 1/8000 speed, f/72, by candlelight
>> Anonymous
>>271456
I can't shoot at f/1.8 in bright sunlight without 1/8000th. That's why I neeed it. Do you understand? And no, I like my shallow DoF, so I won't use f/8. Ok?
>> Anonymous
Heck, my minolta has a max speed of 1/12000, and I actually use it every now and then. It's about DoF control.
>> Anonymous
ND filters :3
>> Anonymous
exactly - neutral density. as was already said. but just to back-up
>> Anonymous
>>271789
9 or 9xi ?
>> Anonymous
>>271920
Why should I use ND-filters instead of 1/8000th?
>> Anonymous
>>272010
seconding this question. why should i use a cumbersome, expensive filter that will degrade image quality and will have to be removed if i stop back down instead of just letting the camera use a faster shutter speed that will reduce motion blur (even if only by a nominal amount)?
>> Anonymous
>>272010

Because of the motion blur you can get. It's appealing and used a lot with water. Waterfalls, water running over rocks, etc.
>> Mr._Laugh_Out_Loud !!rc0QDfC1oX3
>>272084
10\10
>> Anonymous
>>272024
this thread is making me think that photography is dead.
I can't believe you idiots are having this conversation.
>> Anonymous
>>271087

ROFL
GROWS
ROFLROFLROFL
>> Anonymous
>>271961
9xi, sadly. Still a great camera though.
>> Anonymous
i hope pic isn't related cuz you don't need high shutter speed for stuff like that
>> sage rage
     File :-(, x)
>>272118
see mom, somebody thinks i'm funny!

also, this thread smacks of trolldolls

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSony EricssonCamera ModelS500iCamera SoftwareR6BC002 prgCXC1123326_GENERIC_L 0.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:07:18 11:09:57Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/2.8ISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1600Image Height1200RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSubject Distance RangeUnknown