Modern digital cameras using mechanical shuttergenerally have the fastest shutter speed equal to either 1/4000 second or 1/8000 second.
Excerpts 1/4000 and 1/8000 are very short shutter speeds and are used when shooting at high-aperture optics at open aperture values in good light. For example, some photographers use such short excerpts while photographing portraits in the afternoon outdoors. Big aperture lens allows you to achieve narrow DOF, which in some cases is very useful for creating a good portrait. Still so short excerpts apply for maximum effect 'stopping time'when you need to capture fast moving objects (sports photographers are well aware of this).
Exposure 1/4000 s is only 2 times longer than 1/8000 s. It is said that the difference between such shutter speeds is exactly one stop. Many readers have repeatedly mentioned in the comments that when choosing a camera for them, the shortest excerpt shutter. This is usually argued by the fact that with high-aperture optics in cameras with minimal shutter speed 1/4000 is not enough shutter speed to shoot with high-aperture optics. But this is only part of the truth - using especially high-aperture optics on a clear day, 1/8000 will also be useless. A lens was used for the title picture Voigtlander Nokton 58mm F1.4 SL N / AI-Sright Exposition at ISO 100 (Lo1) and 1/8000 is only provided at F / 2 aperture, while F / 1.4-F / 2.0 values are useless due to possible overexposure.
Difference in shutter speed it is easy to compensate with other parameters influencing the exposure: ISO sensitivity, aperture, light filters (especially polarizing and neutral), external light sources (flashes, etc.).
For example, take a lens with a maximum aperture of F / 1.4. Suppose that on a clear day, the camera needs 1/8000, F / 1.4, ISO 100 to achieve the correct exposure. If you use a camera that does not have 1/8000, it is easy to compensate for the lack of shutter speed by the following methods:
- Lower ISO by one step. The result is a set: ISO 50, 1/4000, F / 1.4. The disadvantage of this method is that lowering the ISO is not always possible.
- Close the diaphragm one stop. As a result, you get a set: ISO 100, 1/4000, F / 2.0. The disadvantage of this method is increase in depth of field and in some cases, image deterioration due to bokeh (diaphragm blades can give out nuts).
- Use a neutral density filter. The end result is a set: ISO 100, 1/4000, F / 1.4 + ND2. The disadvantage of this method is that you need to spend money to buy a filter. Cheap filters can degrade image quality. In a room in which there is little light, it is advisable to remove such a filter.
- Use a polarizing filter. As a result, you get a set: ISO 100, 1/4000, F / 1.4 + CPL. The disadvantage of this method is that you need to spend money to buy a filter. Cheap filters can degrade image quality. In a room in which there is little light, it is advisable to remove such a filter. The polarizing filter also makes serious adjustments to the final image.
- Remove in RAW format with overexposure and correct the exposure in the editor. The result is a set: ISO 100, 1/4000, F / 1.4 + processing in the editor with a decrease exposure by -1 ev The disadvantage of this method is that the image quality can be seriously affected when 'pulling the picture out of the overexposure'. I don't think anyone uses this method at all :).
The minimum shutter speed indirectly affects the sync speed with the flash. Typically, cameras that support 1/8000 s have a sync speed of 1/250 s or 1/320 s, and cameras with 1/4000 have a sync speed of 1/200 s. Shutter speed is very important for many tasks using external lighting.
The question '1/4000 versus 1/8000' can easily be inflated to the question '1/2000 versus 1/4000' or '1/8000 versus 1/16.000', since some cameras with mechanical shutter have a minimum shutter speed of 1 / 16.000 (Nikon D1h, Canon EOS-1D). And by the way, cameras with an electronic shutter have no serious limitations in the length of the shortest shutter speed. For example, simple Nikon 1 J1 easily removes 1 / 16.000 :). And, apparently, for those who are tormented in choosing between 1/4000 and 1/8000, Pentax has created cameras with the shortest shutter speed - 1/6000 :).
The conclusions that I made for myself, based on my experience:
- In the vast majority of cases, you don’t need to think about whether the camera supports 1/8000 or not. Exposure 1/8000 is used extremely rarely.
- With 'dark' lenses, this problem simply doesn't exist for the photographer.
- Exposure to 1/8000, like 1/4000, will not always help to achieve the right exposure... The ability to get overexposed by 1/8000 is 2 times lower than by 1/4000. But in some cases even 1/8000 will not provide the required exposure and additional measures will have to be taken to reduce the amount of light. In general - 1/8000 no panacea. There will always be a situation where even 1/8000 will not be enough.
- A minimum shutter speed of 1/8000 often indicates that the photographer has an advanced level camera, but this in no way can be the main criterion when choosing a camera.
- Cameras supporting 1/8000 also have a shorter flash sync speed.
- I stopped bothering with the '1/8000 s versus 1/4000 s' problem a long time ago. It is not difficult for me to slightly cover the diaphragm several times a year and at the same time not lose much in depth of field and bokeh.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval.
I think that ALL camera manufacturers deliberately curtail the capabilities of NEW cameras in order to announce a "new" camera model a little later, which will be slightly better than the previous one, such as Nikon D6 with 1/4000 shutter speed and 39 AF points, after which Nikon D7 can be released with a shutter speed of 1/8000 and 51 AF points, and if people pick up this and buy up the D7, then you can then release the D8 with a shutter speed of 1/16000 and 39 AF points, because "highly artistic photographers" who shoot 90% of frames in the bright sun on apertures of 1.4 simply need a shutter speed of 1/16000, and there are more and more such photographers now ... Personally, I would not even photograph my dog in the bright sun, because no shutter speed of 1/16000 or aperture 1.4 will remove hard terrible shadows from the face, I moved away into the shade, and that's it! and you don’t need a Nikon D8, because there will be 1/400 in the shade, etc., don’t fall for the tricks of the market players, shoot with the camera that you have, pay more attention to the light and composition in the frame. I once saw pictures of a cool photographer and when I found out that they were taken with Nikon D90 I was shocked. Composition, light, and idea in a shot are more important than technique.
If that photo of yours has only sharpness and bokeh - throw it into the basket :)
So I support pro marketers.
You (Sashko Fujifilm X-E2) such short exposures together with 1.2, 1.4, 1.8 on a sunny day are simply necessary to drive your awful city into bokeh) …… ”Composition, light, and idea in the frame decide much more than technique” - and these are golden words, it is a pity that no one here needs it.
And how can I put that? :) Sincere koment, support! :)
Well, with excerpts, everything is not so simple. Nikon was on one of the first 1/16000 models and quickly left, because for a mechanical shutter this is still a test, and the advantage is very doubtful. And the distinction of 1/4000 for the amateur, 1/8000 for the pro also stems from the complexity of the design (read - prices) of the shutter.
No need to blame everything on marketers. This is, of course. But four years passed, and the situation has not changed. So technology is technology.
You offend the anonymous :) That was earlier, as they say young green. Now I began to shoot differently. He began to invest more sense in every frame. http://instagram.com/p/x6jZmaCeHH/?modal=true :) And before I argue, I also went for all these 1/8000, ISO 12800, f1.4G and other tricks for extracting money from people :) Now in cameras I value compactness, control, and tolerable JPEG more, the rest is secondary and not so important.
As they used to say, “You are going the right way, comrade.” Good luck!
Hello. My criterion for choosing a camera is the presence of a shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. and built-in stereo microphone. And that, and another as a drug - having tried it once is already difficult to refuse. Whoever filmed rain, storm, birds in the wind, contact sports, jumping children will understand me. (Not here about a stereo microphone).
It's my opinion.
“Personally, I would not even photograph my dog in the bright sun, because no shutter speed of 1/16000 or aperture of 1.4 will remove hard terrible shadows from my face, I went into the shadows, and that's it!”
Does your dog have a face?
O_o
Carp, there are dogs whose "faces" are much more human than many people. :)
Clear Innocent. Detective dog breeder.
Cats have the same thing
The difference in shutter speed is easily compensated by other parameters affecting the exposure: light filters (especially polarizing and neutral)
Yeah, and also ND. also compensates well. Polyar usually 1 stop sags shutter speed minus. Share info, how can you increase exposure?
ND is the neutral gray filter. How to increase exposure is already described in the article.
And there is variable nd 2-400. True 400 color cuts, but helps well.
What are we talking about, dear? “Zenith TTL” - shutter speed from 1/30 to 1/500, and “B” mode, and that's it ... - what problems did the photographer have? and weddings and children and sports and reporting and whatever you want…. So what about ...? everything has become much better and now it is not enough? I think it's not a question here, but in the ability to work with technology. Photograv initially slightly MAG and WIZARD should be, I think so. May the luminosity be with you!
Soap dishes generally have one exposure .. they were the coolest
It's not that you can take a shot even with a 1/500 limit, just to make it successful with a small aperture and bright light, you need dances with a tambourine. You can take one shutter speed 1/100 for example, and always carry a bucket of filters and light with you, but is it necessary?
The idea of 1/8000 is simple - getting the right exposure when you need such a shutter speed, without additional problems
And who then asked what the photographer needs? What the industry could master, they did. They did not know how to do quick mechanics then, so there were shutters for one and a half exposures with an accuracy of plus or minus a tram stop. So they set the diaphragm “according to the weather”, spit on the bokeh - there was no choice. Plus, the film forgives significant exposure errors.
everyone had, everyone could, read the history of Soviet photography. great ideas were offered - but because of the policy of "the most accessible to the masses" - everything fell on the table. the story with the Soviet Polaroid, commissioned by the surprised general secretary, or electronic Zenit-D 1969 http://www.photohistory.ru/Pictures/ZenitD4.jpg Well this is essentially Nikonvan Wulframe 1969. so here
I read all this and know. Do you understand the meaning of the phrase "did not master"? It does not matter who and what offered, since they were not put on the conveyor - this means “they did not master it”. The reasons are already secondary. The fact that a bunch of prototypes were made that did not go into series and did not become available to mere mortals does not change in any way that mere mortals could only be content with “Zenith” with the fastest shutter speed of 1/500. By the way, the resource of these cameras, contrary to the widespread misconception, was low - the mechanics broke down with a bang.
So the film was basically 32,64 iso and the lens was regular at best Helios with a relative 2 and at worst Industar 3,5.
the way it is. few people remember that these were real FF full frames. sorry Arkady will not make a review, although soap dishes are cheap, about 1 cu per kilogram
Those soap dishes are an excellent confirmation that FF is not a panacea. For most of those point-and-shoot cameras were shot in such a way that even the most lame smartphones today produce results that are orders of magnitude better. They were only suitable for shooting outdoors in bright weather. with a single exposure, even the wide dynamic range of the film was insufficient. The quality of the optics was comparable to the peephole - only the center of the frame was sharp ... There was definitely nothing to review - all the functionality is the film scroll wheel, the shutter button and the lens damper. Well, the flash toggle switch and the “light / not very light” aperture switch are optional ...
Is that what you tell us all? Millions have filmed them, there are a lot of masterpieces in albums, negatives are stored, digitized. 35mm FF. The working section is suitable for the UPC. This is laziness, or Arkady under different names, just not to smoke a soap dish. Smartphones ... smartphones? Such a G ... to be honest, these smartphones give out. One est is normal - this is Samsung s5610, well, but the "most sucking" ... I do not know, to be honest, what you smoked when you wrote this ...
“35mm FF. The working distance fits on the BZK "just not to smoke a soap dish" - and what did you smoke? And what has the focal length, mirrorless or soap dish? Or do you call Soviet scale cameras with soap dishes? Then I have bad news for you, you don't know much about cameras. Soap trays are Chinese plastic cameras with fixed optics, fixed focus, fixed aperture and one, maximum two shutter speeds. Flash is optional. Or did you want Arkady to rip the lens out of such a camera and put it on a freshly purchased Sony mirrorless camera? These cameras were shot with a terrible quality - if you didn't shoot with this, then you don't have to say anything, if you consider the pictures from these cameras to be masterpieces - then I don't understand at all what you forgot on the site where cameras of a much higher level are discussed.
“One est normal - this is Samsung s5610” - yes, you understand even worse in smartphone cameras than in film cameras ...
here you are. the whole CIS was filmed and so was I. and the plastic kodak gave normal quality. and the samsung5610 with a 1/4-inch matrix in the Yandex.fotki rating in the section "what they shoot" - look at the first places. if it is necessary to rip it out, it will pull it out, what a hysteria. He even punctured a tin can. And in general, his hands do not grow out of f *** on his campaign, like some. and who are you to tell someone where to go, do you want me to show you the direction?
"The whole CIS was filmed and so was I." - So what? This is not a quality indicator. Kodak, yes, more or less made soap dishes, and all sorts of UFOs, which were filled up with shops - rubbish. But yes, the main thing for you is the size of the frame and the focal length, and the optics and other characteristics are secondary, the masterpieces are made by FF ... And you don't have to be bummed, she will show me the direction here ...
ban_set
that's driving dude
... "hot Finnish guys" ... So - summed up. Life is a return
a forgotten loan, that is, a will ... why are we arguing so swiftly ... TWENTY years will pass ... And? Excerpt from infinity to 1 / 8 - to the masses ... And? What will you have to say about THIS then? And it was 000/000 and nothing, they were doing it, wasn't it.
somehow I had to pull out the overexposure by 1 stop (set the correction, then forgot for a few frames in conditions where it was not needed), everything is normal, the result is not noticeable. And the impression is that for most frames and a half stop back and forth is not supercritical. Naturally shot in RAW.
Arkady pulled 4 stops, there is an article on the site)))
And I recently had to pull a frame out of -3 stops, I didn’t even believe that something would stretch out, but I could pull out the essence. Of course, it’s better not to do this and shoot right right away.
After such extracts, you need to change the BB, and ZP to reduce the juiciness or saturation. A woman's face is highlighted separately.
In the early 30s of the last century, the future “father of photo reportage” and “founder of photojournalism”, then unknown to anyone Henri Cartier-Bresson, bought a novelty of the then market - a 35 mm Leica with the usual fifty dollars. Maybe the then marketers were still honest guys and didn’t get him the Nikon D4s + 70-200 f2,8 VRII at an exorbitant price, or maybe he didn’t have $ 7500 on his card, but he didn’t approve the loan, now you don’t recognize it ... still Leica !!! And Henri came home, opened the box with a brand new Leica and realized with horror how he was thrown in the store! And this Leica did not have a shutter speed of 1/8000 ... or even 1/4000 ... and even 1/1000 ... And then they did not come up with autofocus with 3D tracking at 51 points, 15 of which are cross-type! Kapets! What to do?! How am I going to become a REPORTING GENIUS without 1/8000, Henri thought? Can you start studying painting, graphics, composition? That's right today! Turn off the fuck Dom-2, and not spam today on forums until morning, but take the book "Fundamentals of frame composition"? Can the study of the art form and geometry of the intraframe space somehow compensate for the lack of 1/8000 shutter speed? And Henri began to educate himself, feed his brain with useful information, read smart books, communicate with artists, and do personal exhibitions. He even developed his own method of shooting, which he called "The Decisive Moment", and published a book of the same name. And when I had already become famous and highly paid, I realized that you can score for the absence of 1/8000, no matter WHAT to shoot, it is important WHAT to shoot.
I apologize for breaking your buzz from my own eloquence, but if you, before writing in such an inspired syllable, took the trouble to at least take an interest in the history and biography of such a respected person, you would find that he studied at an art studio from the age of 5. I quote "Cartier-Bresson owes much of his outstanding skill as a photographer to his education as an artist and graphic artist."
And since the purchase of his first watering can, at 22! years before the start of the more or less sane Internet, as many as 75 years have passed. All this time I had to work with my hands and feet, and not with the index finger on my right hand, and I'll tell you this, the experience is colossal. Yes, perhaps at that time they did not soar due to the lack of a shutter speed of 1/8000 of a second, but believe me, they had to solve many other problems. And you shouldn't think that the geniuses of photography “saw, pointed and shot”, if you study Bresson's work well, you can find the stories of those who worked or lived next to him and saw. how carefully he arranged most of his famous shots and on the developed films, there were many takes of the same plot.
I think if he had a camera with 1/8000 shutter speed at that time, he would certainly have used it.
No need to apologize, I'm not a particularly confused person by nature.
Too shy to ask, do you disagree with me AT ALL PRINCIPLE? or for some significant dates from the biography of the master?
What's the principle? in the fact that Besson took the TOP camera at that time (i.e. the then 4s) and freely created with its help? Moreover, despite the fact that THEN it was a breakthrough and a new vision, now - filming “like sleeplessness” - will at best join the ranks of Instagrammers?
He didn’t shoot on the gimbal, shouting that “the artist will be able to shoot at least an obscura on the camera !! 111”. He shot for the best, at that time the achievement of technology, by the way.
Yes, I'm not worried about trifles either, just your phrase “How can I become a REPORTING GENIUS without 1/8000, Henri thought? Can you start studying painting, graphics, composition? That's right today! "
Like "I have nothing else to do but study and improve my life's work."
Despite the fact that this is what he studied. Such phrases are like fake notes in a beautiful melody.
This is according to Bresson, but at the expense of shutter speed of 1 \ 8000 seconds, it’s not that I would disagree with you AT ALL, as a matter of fact, they simply do not construct a camera for the sake of one shutter speed, there are a lot of other gadgets in it, some cameras are cooler than others . In my cell, for example, there is 1 \ 8000 and I am glad about this, let it be better than not. In addition, when shooting on walks in the desert, the camera often gives shutter speeds of 1 \ 5000 and 1 \ 6000. Do you understand? I am for 1 \ 8000.
I have already written in the Nikon D600 thread that I filmed my first wedding in 1980 on Zenit E, and somehow I managed it, although it didn’t have less than 1/500! And my first PHOTO EXHIBITION took place in 1987, in Astrakhan, and it was called “The Sea and Sailors”. At that time I had three cameras - “Moscow” - with the shortest shutter speed 1/250, but with a frame size of 6 by 9 cm! There was also a panoramic “Horizon” with the fastest shutter speed of 1/250, with a slit shutter. And “Zenith TTL”, which had the shortest shutter speed of 1/500. The entire shooting took place on the Caspian Sea, where the sun, glare and ultraviolet light are no less than on any other sea or in the desert. And I didn’t cry or whine that the fucking engineers hadn’t come up with 1/8000 yet, but how am I going to work? ... I used filters, except for “Horizon” (nothing with it), - photographic film with different light sensitivity, takes with apertures, where is it maybe everything worked out great! The size of the works for the exhibition is maximum 60 by 90 cm, minimum 30 by 40 cm. LOOK! And the exhibition was held with a bang, and the magazine Soviet Photo published several works.
No need to come up with a non-existent problem, and for months to suck it on the forums. Stop practicing photoanism! Better take a camera and go shoot!
Well, you are a fine fellow, go ahead and shoot on “Moscow”, and jump with filters, publishing in a Soviet photo, and Bright and I will somehow live with carcasses giving out 1/8000.
Frets?
I did not respond to your two comments above, because I have the impression that you suffer from acute intellectual disabilities. You called Henri Cartier-Bresson “Besson” twice, so this is not a typo. Apparently for you Luc Besson and Cartier-Bresson are one and the same. And moreover, they wrote the following phrase: “now - the one who shoots“ like sleeplessness ”will at best join the ranks of Instagrammers”. This is your PEARL, I don't even want to comment.
For the third time I decided to answer, since you are so itching to do so, or rather to reassure you: “... we have a road for the young everywhere,” a flag in your hands, a drum on your neck, and a fair wind in ... which raises your personal social status. Only you are in vain to cling to Bright, he is no match for you. Unlike you, he writes without errors, thoughtfully and competently.
For several years I have been a member of the “Union of Photo Artists of Russia”, my works are still published, I have been working closely with photo banks for many years, I have been giving master classes. This brings me a good annual income, and of course I allow myself to have top-end cameras and top-end glasses. And they have 1/8000 exposure. But I also have a D600 which does NOT have 1/8000, but which I use no less, and maybe more, than other cameras. By the way, 70-80 percent of work for photobanks is D600.
I will advise you, instead of measuring your pussy, go to ZNUI, and undergo training at least until the second stage of PHOTOMASTERY.
Frets?
Nuuu .... No one here, except you, “didn’t put on the table with a ruler” in two paragraphs listing the awards, apparently considering that they “raise the status” Alas, they do not. Actually, from what we can conclude - "the more a person demands respect for himself, the less he deserves it."
Here you go! And you, it turns out, are able to express their thoughts adequately.
Don’t be offended, they give rewards for this to increase your social status. But I didn’t even begin to list them. I just hate rudeness, even light, youthful. Successful frames to you on 1/8000.
Brezhnev agrees with you about the awards.
well, don't bear it. You never know who does not tolerate something, someone is rudeness, someone is milk foam. I have a terrible allergy to stupidity, for example. Moreover, what is interesting is that it is completely independent of age.
Your creepy allergies are easy to treat. But your impenetrable stupidity is incurable.
Gentlemen, I offer battle (battle / deel). Only not in pisyunami, but with the help of specific works that can demonstrate your photographic abilities / talents. The essence of the duel is that each of the rivals will post on photos with any plot and theme, and the community will judge you.
'bokeshkami-shmokeshkah'- Class !!!
Dadada, a duel, for sure!
And then this crap will never end.
We set the plot, two debaters upload photos and vote.
Example:
1. Landscape sunny spring nature
2. Landscape overcast nature spring
3. Landscape sunny city
4. Still life of fruits
5. Portrait room
6. Portrait street
+1
just today noticed this little article.
for me 1 \ 8000 is important - I shoot in the open in the sun and this shutter speed is almost enough for a frame without overexposure.
in addition, sometimes I shoot, let's say, some technical shots where you need to shoot very fast moving objects. also such a fast shutter speed is needed. and even faster - too. (and it is not always possible to use for these purposes a short light pulse illuminating the target, as they sometimes do)
of course, it would be most correct to use ultra-high-speed filming, but such a camera is rather bulky and, again, not always convenient.
How many of you fighting in the battle of shutter speeds know about medium format cameras and their characteristics? )))
Or it's not a camera. Or do they not shoot the pros?
We know, we know. SF not only the pros filmed and are filming.
Correctly. And what are the shortest shutter speeds in SF? And nothing, people shoot and shoot very well. Only you need to approach the matter wisely, and not from the position of a bomber - to pull the bride into the light of day in white at noon. )))
Snowy peaks and white clouds below are a clear example of using either very fast shutter speeds or expensive ND filters.
How fast is SF removed? Frames 5-7 will be on dynamic scenes, when you need to select only one successful frame from a series?
there the lenses are darkening, why do they need short shutter speeds?
they are not dark, but darkened))
filmed with gimbal camera at f/64