File :-(, x, )
1/focal length rule for shutter speed Anonymous
everyone should know this rule of thumb

but why do we have to multiply for crop factor, a 50mm is a 50mm and always will be

why do i have to shoot at 1/75 or 1/80 instead of just 1/50
>> Anonymous
I usually shoot 1/50th or 1/60th with my 50mm lens or the kit lens on my 400D. Depends on how steady your hands are.

In b4 parkinsons
>> Anonymous
yeah, it depends on the person

but what's the logic in factoring the crop to the 1/fl rule
>> Anonymous
>>151920
Magnification. Motion blur blurs details. If you're at 24mm, you're going to be picking up a lot less detail (or blur, if that's what replaces it) than at 240mm.

For the same reason, faster shutter speeds are needed if you're shooting as close with a 24mm as you normally would with a 240mm. It's a general rule of thumb, not an absolute. I don't really use it myself... I tend to just go intuitively with what I think I can handhold at that particular moment. It gives a great deal of leeway that most photographers (who know how to hold their cameras) in most situations are better off without.
>> Anonymous
Because 50mm on a crop camera acts like an 80mm lens.

Yes, the lens is still 50mm, but the viewing angle is also cropped, and thus camera shake would appear to be increased.
>> Anonymous
>>151943Yes, the lens is still 50mm, but the viewing angle is also cropped, and thus camera shake would appear to be increased.

take a 5d/1ds/d3, put a 50mm on it and take a picture at 1/50, that gives you a good picture

then crop the image so the frame is equivalent to 75/80mm, the image is still good

a crop camera doesn't record the information the 50mm projects, only the center part equivalent to 75/80mm

so why would i have to use 1/75 or 1/80 when 1/50 should have been fine
>> Anonymous
>>151949
It won't be, though. Cropping brings out flaws in the image. Printing larger brings out flaws in the image. Stepping closer brings out flaws in the image. Using a longer lens brings out flaws in the image, provided you don't compensate by stepping farther away.

It's all about magnfication.
>> Anonymous
>>151949
Fucking obstinate fag is obstinate.
>> Anonymous
>>151953Cropping brings out flaws in the image

you're cropping an image, not resizing it, how does that bring out flaws in the image

i take a picture of a bird on a branch, i crop it to remove distrcting shit or to reframe, i'm not resizing anything, i'm CROPPING

if you're talking about a crop sensor extrapolating the image to fill the frame, that's another story

IN ANY CASE, this doesn't explain why you need to apply crop factor to 1/FL rule
>> Anonymous
>>151957

shut your mouth bitch
>> Anonymous
>>151958
Yes, it does. A crop sensor magnifies the image produced by the lens more.
>> Anonymous
>>151958
For that matter, you might as well grab a 4/3rds camera and put on a 50mm lens. Are you still going to use 1/50s?
>> Anonymous
>>151967

read: if you're talking about a crop sensor extrapolating the image to fill the frame, that's another story
>> Anonymous
>>151968

that's a trick question

no one uses 4:3
>> Anonymous
>>151974
Nobody was there to see the big bang, it's a fucking theory. This is a theory too, obstinatefag.
>> Anonymous
ITT troll op is trollin
>> Anonymous
>>151978

don't bring jesus into this please
>> Anonymous
>>151973
That's what all crop-sensor cameras do, though.
>> Anonymous
>>151981
OK, yeah, this post convinced me this is a troll.
>> Anonymous
>>151982That's what all crop-sensor cameras do, though.

so why don't we just use 1/FL then

the image processor extrapolates to full frame anyway, the extra data is lost

there's no point to factor in crop factor
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>151981
O HAY

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2005:04:06 14:57:19Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width250Image Height355
>> Anonymous
ohhh you silly little anons

50mm lens is still 50mm lens on crop sensor.
BUT the sensor is A BIT SMALLER than the field of view of the 50mm lens

that doesnt mean that the 50mm lens become 80mm......

what we get in result is the equivalent of what we would get out of an 80mm lens

THUS on 50mm lens.. 1/50

case closed...
>> Anonymous
>>152006
Doesnt become an 80mm, it just acts exactly like one, except for DOF
>> Anonymous
>>152006

I guess that is why compact cameras never have camera shake then.
>> Anonymous
>>152015
Exactly! you should be able to handhold an 8mm (38mm equivalent) lens at 1/8s just fine, RIGHT?
>> Anonymous
>>152006


the rule of 1/focal length is measured on the equivalent (what you get)

if 50mm is acting as a 80mm on cropped, then u use 1/80 etc
>> Anonymous
>>152023if 50mm is acting as a 80mm on cropped, then u use 1/80 etc

we're back to square one
>> Anonymous
The effect of camera shake depends on the ANGLE OF VIEW of the lens/camera system, not on the actual focal length. The same amount of shake will give identical blur on a compact with a 8mm lens that has a 40 degree angle of view and a medium format SLR with a 90mm lens that has the same 40 degree angle of view. (Of course, it will be harder to shake a MF SLR because it's heavier)

It just happened that for 35mm film SLRs, 1/FL turned out to be a good empirical rule. To apply this rule to a camera with a smaller sensor, you have to consider the angle of view.

Example:
1. Your 50mm lens on an APS-C camera gives an angle of view of approx. 25 degrees.
2. Thus, the shake will be felt exactly like on a full-frame camera with a 25 degree lens.
3. To achieve a 25 degree angle of view on a full-frame camera, we need to mount a 80mm lens on it.
4. A full-frame camera with a 80mm lens is handholdable at 1/80s if we use the rule.
5. Thus, our crop-sensor camera will be handholdable at the same 1/80s.
>> Anonymous
>>152046

FLAWLESS VICTORY
>> Anonymous
i don't know what you guys are talking about but my camera tells me when there's camera shake

so i just use that
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>152213
mine has 4 levels of shake, i generally ignore it.

im waiting for the milk upgrade.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152214
Yeah, but Nikon and Canon will come out with versions and we'll be all like "it's better than yours". Damn right, it's better than yours.
>> Anonymous
Use VR, I shoot super sharp on 1/5 with my 105mm VR!
>> Canon !2okH7k70zo
>>152289

No, I won't. I have a firm stance on lens IS.

I might add an indicator on the viewfinder to show shake but I won't implement sensor shift.

My implementation is superior and well documented.

See documentation: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/lens/index.html
>> Anonymous
>>152297
Yeah but you're using crappy Canon's
>> Anonymous
>>152297
Wouldn't it make sense to offer sensor-shift for photographers who want to use non-stabilized Canon lenses but could benefit from IS? (Examples include any of your primes.)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>152405
No because then canon cant force everyone to buy more expensive lenses.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152405
Not as much sense as it would make for them to slowly add IS versions of all of their lenses so you had to buy new ones and they could still claim that lens-shift works better than sensor-shift.
>> Anonymous
>>152407
>>152409

This is true, but it's still pretty lousy of Canikon to be doing for people who want to keep using a particular lens.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152413
Yep.

FL -> FD -> EF (and to a lesser extent, EF-S)
Basic F-Mount -> AI -> AF -> AF-S/AF-I -> G

Lousy, but not unprecedented.
>> Canon !2okH7k70zo
>>152409they could still claim that lens-shift works better than sensor-shift.

I really don't have to claim it. It's just clearly superior.

Maybe after a few generations of sensor shift it will catch up but I'll have new lens IS by then. I'm kind of tired to sit on my ass and just raking in money doing nothing.