1 / 4000 vs 1 / 8000

Modern digital cameras using mechanical shuttergenerally have the fastest shutter speed equal to either 1/4000 second or 1/8000 second.

1 / 4000 vs 1 / 8000

1 / 4000 vs 1 / 8000

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:

  1. 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.
  2. With 'dark' lenses, this problem simply doesn't exist for the photographer.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Cameras supporting 1/8000 also have a shorter flash sync speed.
  6. 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. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment: Alexander Malyaev

 

 

Comments: 120, on the topic: 1/4000 against 1/8000

  • Andrei

    Great article. I fully support Arkady. At the D100 itself, the shutter speed is 5100 and for all the time of use with aperture optics it took 14000 times from the force.

    • Rustam

      It is necessary to understand figuratively that on the FF cameras 1 \ 8000 plays the role of 1 \ 4000 as on crop. My d90 has a standard ISO of 200 and if you put Lo1, then the DD will suffer. On F2-iso200-1 \ 4000 in the morning summer there are already overexposures. And it’s not even worth putting 85 Samyang 1.4 for lunch.
      I lead to the fact that to sacrifice iso (below the level) is not very good in portraits.

    • anonym

      I also agree, you can cover the aperture at 2,8 and the bokeh will be good and the sharpness is excellent and I focus 100% correctly!

  • Uladzimir

    Polarizing and neutral density filters are our everything.

  • anonym

    We take nikon d810, de basic sensitivity is repaired from iso 64, and expanded from iso 32, we take, for example, object 35 1.4 and showcase 1/8000 and nothing is oversized and the picture is miraculous. =)

  • TVU

    Yeah, and on my Nik 50mm 1: 1.2 on a nice sunny day, only ISO at minus 200 will save :-) I have to close at least 2 or even 2.8.

  • Movritsio

    Thank you, Arkady)) As always, a very informative article. And ... yes for sure ... I have the D70 1/500 with a flash.

  • anonym

    I have a Pentax K-5, min shutter speed 1/8000, synchronization 1 / 180. Disorder, but also not particularly necessary).

  • Anatoly

    The main issue is not addressed in the article.
    that a short shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. The shutters of some modern DSLRs are intentionally programmatically trimmed. The mechanics of the modern shutter, constructively, without problems, allow you to work out 1/8000 sec. and more.

    This is a trick by marketers, so that the model does not come close to the pro class, in addition, the office will have a reserve on the proposal of excerpts of 1/6000, 1/8000 already in future models, it turns out that they can no longer offer something new, therefore roll back, so the games begin with exposure.

    • Alexander

      This kind of “conspiracies” of marketers looks more like consumer paranoia.

      • Maximum

        I don’t know how in the case of exposure 1/8000, but in general the fact takes place - quite often marketers deliberately degrade characteristics in products that are positioned in the low price segment (so that there is more reason to buy more expensive models).

        Examples: cars.
        From the point of view of the cost of materials, it makes absolutely no difference what color to make the upholstery of the chairs. However, in cars of a low price segment, many manufacturers NAROCHITO make more tasteless (lurid, cheerful, ridiculous polka dots, a checker or a flower) upholstery, although they can just as well pull on a neutral gray fabric, which, although it will not look "rich", but at least it will not cause feelings of disgust and rejection. This is done in order to maintain an artificial division into classes "low (economy)", "average (mass)", above average (for "aspirants"), "luxury". It's the same with the handlebar tape, the plastic on the panel, and the body colors.

        In household appliances, marketers once came up with the idea that a silver refrigerator (or matte under "metallic") is a sign of luxury, and a trivial white is "for the masses." True, the Chinese and Koreans very quickly learned this feature, and now this artificial criterion has been leveled, tk. a bunch of cheap sub-metallic models appeared.

      • Anatoly

        Paranoia just from those who blindly believe that buying the latest DSLR model thinks that it was the engineers, not the marketers, who put their soul into its design, you’re quick to see who I’m talking about :)
        And the reality is completely different, modern central shuttle locks have a shutter with electronic control and moving the blinds in the focal plane, with this design the curtain shutter efficiency reaches 95%, and the minimum shutter speed can reach 1/16000 s (Canon EOS-1D, Nikon D1 "). The shortest shutter-speed shutter shutter shutter speed is determined only by the accuracy limit of the spring adjustment, which is done without significant production costs, ensuring the synchronization of the curtains. Shutters of special designs with a fixed slit can provide shutter speeds in millionths of a second.

        • Alexander

          I dare;) Anatoly, with all due respect, you are not an engineer at Nikon Corporation. Therefore, this is only your speculation, and you affirm (!) How you yourself somehow designed something similar.

        • Denis

          On the Nikon D1, the shutter speed of the shutter was higher (see the sync speed with the flash), and therefore the minimum shutter speed is 1/16000.

      • Anton

        However, many solutions that were ubiquitous on film cameras have not yet been implemented in digital form. Take the same ai control and tracking autofocus, which was on quite budget Canon cameras. If the follower appeared relatively recently on the models of the middle segment, then we won’t see the control until marketers give the go-ahead.

    • Taras

      I think that the entry-level CZK shutter (for example, D5100) is technically impossible, and it is not worth "overclocking" to 1 \ 16000 values ​​by hacking the firmware and removing the software restriction. Indeed, for high-speed gates, initially having a shutter speed of 1/16000, the curtains and levers must experience significantly higher mechanical loads, therefore they must be made from more durable materials, must have appropriate dampers and dampers for curtain vibrations in extreme positions.
      The shutter speed is always the same at all shutter speeds. The duration of the action of light on the matrix determines the width of the shutter slit between the shutters moving one after the other. The flash sync speed will determine at what value the shutter slit width is equal to the sensor height. Therefore, the shorter the sync speed, the greater the acceleration experienced by the curtains and the entire shutter mechanism. Accordingly, the wear of the mechanism is greater.
      I think the future lies not with mechanics, but with polarizing LCD shutters. Their speed is much higher, because the role of the gate is played by liquid crystal molecules in an electric field. The less mechanics in the chamber, the more reliable. So in 10-15 years we will see an exposure of 1 \ 128000 for photographic registration of fissioning atomic nuclei)))))

      • Rustam

        "The less mechanics in the chamber, the more reliable." I have already changed two kenon soap dishes due to unreliability, the old man 1d M2 and nikon d90 live and are cut off with serials. I have already survived two Android-Gelaxis, I stopped at the Nokia 8800.

        • Taras

          Let us compare the method of transmitting the command to close the diaphragm to the set value in Nikon and Canon. In the first - mechanical, through the lever of the "jump rope", in the second - electronic through an additional pair of contacts. The question is: in which system will the "jump rope" break faster or require adjustment? Of course, Canon lenses have an additional electromagnet or servo motor that closes the diaphragm, which Nikon's lenses do not have. But the drive in each Canon lens is different, and Nikon's mechanics in the carcass sets the diaphragm in motion from the whole park of optics that the photographer has. When will Nikon give up his mechanical "jumping rope"?

        • Ivan

          I, too, for the good old mechanics! My Nikon D200 has never failed me in 10 years, and so far there aren’t even any hints

      • Denis

        “I think the future lies not with mechanics, but with polarizing LCD shutters. Their performance is much higher, because the role of the gate is played by liquid crystal molecules in an electric field. " - Do you know what is the speed of these LCD crystals? Not aware of the LCD monitor response problem that engineers have been struggling with for years and decades to ensure that these monitors work adequately at high FPS? LCDs have a very low response rate, this is the same mechanics, but at the molecular level - to change the light transmission, the crystals must be rotated under the action of an electric field - and this takes a lot of time to, first, electrify the molecules, and second, for the crystals to rotate ...
        So there will probably not be electronic shutters based on the LCD.

        • Taras

          LCD response time is on average 5 ms. I think that in the future this problem will be solved with further study of new LC molecules

      • Gene jb

        Strange, Taras, you contradict yourself. That "the speed of the curtains is always the same", then "increased loads". If the curtain speed is the same, then the load is the same. There may be another problem - the synchronization accuracy of the second relative to the first. Most likely, it is simply not possible to achieve the accuracy of the shutter speed itself, so it is left within the limits where the accuracy is still there. Unfortunately, even in hacker's firmware, there is no access to these parameters, because it is controlled by its own processor, otherwise this myth could be debunked.

        • Taras

          By “the same” I mean the speed of movement of the curtains of one particular shutter for different exposures. And if you somehow force the same shutter to open its full width at once at a shorter shutter speed (i.e. the curtains will move faster), the load on the mechanism will increase.

    • anonym

      And if professional programmers take and programmatically finish up to normal ISO and normal exposure range. Who's bothering?

  • Novel

    Exposure in 1/4000 was not enough a couple of times when shooting a portrait on F 1.8. Used an ND filter in these cases. I would like to have 1/8000, but not so critical, you can also adjust the exposure in the editor.

    • Alexander

      Relights are sometimes difficult to fix. And sometimes it’s impossible. Arkady correctly said that there is a reason to cover up a bit.

      • Novel

        Of course, it is permissible to overexpose only as much as can be corrected later in the editor (the degree of overexposure can still be estimated). Otherwise, close the diaphragm. To wind up filters and make a few test shots, of course, you can only if you have time. If not, close the diaphragm. The only way )))

  • Sergei

    That's when min. exposure 1/4000 and min. ISO - 200, this is an ambush! And filters are schmilters, they are not always at hand, and sometimes there is simply no time to wind them up, and it can suddenly be impatient to take a picture on the open one.

  • sergey

    The exit is very simple, even money is not especially needed for revision, this is a combination shutter an addition to the mechanical electronic shutter, but with the electronic shutter the picture is modified that is unevenly stretched so that moving (very fast) objects are kindly taken to take pictures with a covered hole and a mechanical shutter and portraits (not moving ) electronic and everyone is happy

    • Anonymous 1

      Probably, you are right in something, but in a strange way you explain ... (forgive me for pedantry). As if they used the Russian language in a distant past life ...

  • StudioRAK

    to solve the problem, Fujiki X-T1 added an electronic shutter to the mechanical shutter, allowing you to shoot with shutter speeds up to 1/32000 :) https://vk.com/photo8202382_350816198

    • Alexander

      And what does that picture show?

      • Oleg

        Halogen that shows.

  • Dim

    As far as I know, short exposures are not needed at all for portraits, but for sports photographers, it is enough to find photographs of people doing this at a high level, for example from the Tour de France and look at the properties - there you can find both high ISO and sufficiently clamped apertures and respectively the shutter speeds 1/8000 and 1/4000. It is quite natural that their cameras operate in S mode.
    Those who know why they need it - buy the necessary equipment. It is clear that a wedding photographer may not need this, but why speak for everyone? Maybe my child is very active or goes to the sports section, maybe I need to take photos from the competition? Of course it can, that's when I put the camera in S mode and put it in 1/4000 or 1/8000.

    • Lynx

      We drag that "freezing" of a moving person begins already from 1/400. So the usual 1/4000 will be enough for you with a large margin, unless you are going to shoot Flash)))

      • Dim

        I won't say about Flash, I have several photos of Vincenzo at the stage where they were driving on pavement in the rain. Raindrops falling off the helmet in “bokeh” look just great and add dynamics to the photo, I think that the shutter speed and aperture (in this case, it was 1/1600 and f / 7.1) were chosen so as to focus attention on it and create a feeling movement that the photographer really managed.

  • Pastor

    Great article. I fully support. I have cameras in my hands with both 1/4000 and 1/8000. Never bother with this indicator. I can hardly imagine a situation where closing the diaphragm would not allow me to get what I wanted. And yes, 1/8000 is also sometimes not enough for me. In summer, on the beach or in winter on a sunny day, there will be a strong overexposure at 1.4 or even 1.8. On the other hand, there is a purely psychological moment when you know that if you can reduce exposure to 1/8000, then someone probably needs it. But still it’s easier to slightly cover the diaphragm.
    It was once in the summer with me and this - at 50d at 1/8000, ISO100, even a pancake 40 2.8 on the open gave overexposure. I realized that even 2.8 from 1/8000 will not always save the situation. In this case, Iso 50 pleases in a number of models - it also helps with overexposure.

  • Andrei

    Arkady, as always, thanks for the article. If it’s easy to explain about the extended ISO value and how it works, I had a device with a shutter speed of 1/8000 and a minimum of ISO 100, now 1/4000 and ISO 50 (Lo). Is this iso 50 is not an analogue of what you shoot at iso 100 and then stop the exposure in the editor and lower the exposure, in this case, shooting in bright sunshine at iso 50 makes no sense.

  • Charles

    But for the owners of Leek, the limit of 1/4000 for some reason does not soar ... Why would it be?

    • Pastor

      I dare to assume that there is a reason for this and lies in the owners. Buyers of watering cans or highly professional photographers who know what and how to do to get the right exposure and little things like the lack of 1/8000 do not bother them at all, or just rich people who decide to buy a beautiful status item, they often do things like shutter speed and aperture what are they talking about.

  • Evgeny*

    Arkady thanks for the article. I'm curious to see the difference when shooting sports at 4000 and 8000 .... Is this difference felt in freezing?

  • Novel

    It seems that not only the owners of watering can sin this

  • Madness scif

    there will never be a splash in 1/8000 game, but overexposure of the picture is not good. even in RAW ... because overexposures do not last well on any cameras, but a slight under-light is another matter))))

    • Sashko Fujifilm X-E2

      On Nikon D3s, from OVERLIGHT to RAW, parts are just as easy to pull as from BACKLIGHT. Straight equally stretch.

      • Alexander

        The situation is similar with the D600. Just recently, for the sake of interest, I checked it. Apparently, a person uses Canon technology;)))

        • Madness scif

          no, Alexander, apparently a person uses nikons) due to lack of light, the supply of DD is more than 2 to 10 steps - you only have noise ... but with knocked out details, well, a maximum of one and a half steps

  • Jury

    I set experiments with Fujdi s5pro. I noticed that if the DD of the plot being shot is small, it is much easier to fix the overexposure of 2 stops in the editor than the oversight of the same 2 stops. If there are 2 stops of oversight, a slight noise will definitely appear, especially if the ISO was different from 100, and when overexposed, all the details are restored, there is no noise :). Although all the books write that overexposure should be avoided. If the frame has a large DD, then overexposure should definitely be excluded.

  • varezhkin

    wonderful debunking of a myth! eh, you should have bought some kind of ND filter, not too lazy.

  • Baky

    Arkady! Dobryi den. Snimali li vy na NIKON D1? Kak vam vyderjka 1/16000. Moschnaya? How oschuscheniya? Pochemu na vash vzglyad v sovremennyh topovyh tushkah ne delayut 1/16000?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      LEET MODE ON: R4807 @ 5 N1K0n d1 D0V0ln0 Ud08N0, 370 k4m3r4 5 Pr0F35510n4lN0j 3RG0n0M1k0J. vyD3RKZH4 1/16000 08U5l0Vl3N4 m1N1m4LnyM 150, K070r03 r4VNY4375Y4 zn4Ch3N1yU 200 3d1N1c. 05080j R4ZN1CY m3zhDU 1/16000 1 1/8000 1 1/4000 v1zu4LN0 v 99% n3 Z4M3735h. 1 35hH3 - P3r3574n73 p15 @ N4 7R4n5l173, 370 d1K0 83517.

      • Jury

        Almost like Enigma :)

      • AM

        Arkady, why are you like this? Maybe a person just doesn’t have a keyboard with Cyrillic characters on hand?

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Let him use the on-screen keyboard :)

        • Denis

          I don’t understand at all who, why and why in our time writes transliteration.

      • Maugli

        Elegant!

  • Dmitriy

    Arkady correctly wrote. But, as I suspect (and I’m hardly mistaken), I didn’t do reportage shooting in strongly, quickly and often changing conditions. The maximum aperture of my working lenses is 2,8. Not the fastest. At the same time, these are zooms, which themselves are darker than fixes with a similar hole (if anyone doubts, I’m ready to stupidly show the photo, all other things being equal). Often you have to shoot in the shade with an open hole and immediately change the shooting location (often at full speed). It is difficult to change something on the run, especially when holding two cameras. In general, quite often in EXIF ​​I see data 1/8000. About 1/6000 and I’m completely silent nearby.
    So the minimum exposure for me personally is a pretty important parameter.

    • Alexey

      all right. ISO - there is such a concept as basic, usually it = 100 (on some cameras = 200). which means that a decrease or increase in relation to the base ISO will definitely degrade the image quality.
      if you shoot in conditions when the depth of field is undesirable to change (and because of bokeshki), then you can play only by exposure.

      a typical example is shooting people on a sunny day with variable clouds. every 2-3 minutes the lighting changes, when there are no clouds, 1/8000 is needed, the cloud covered the sun - 1/2000.
      the filter is not an option at all, until you remove or fasten the lighting again.
      there are many such options, the park is a shade of trees, etc.

      for an amateur it is quite possible that there is no problem at all.
      for a pro or an advanced amateur this is a problem. what nicon or kenon marketers are well aware of, and it was by cutting exposure that they recently began to clearly separate the camera lines.

  • Gene jb

    I had many times that 4000 was not enough, but at the same time I think that sometimes 8000 was not enough. So it’s pointless to chase. Simply hook the filter. I don’t have FP, so on a sunny day I have to shoot at 200 with a filter.

  • Dmitriy

    In general, I concluded for myself that 1/8000 or 1/4000 is of no fundamental importance for civilian use.

    • Sashko Fujifilm X-E2

      +

      • Alexey

        What are you doing? But how to praise your favorite Fuj for excerpts 1/32000?

    • Alexander

      For civilian values, I think so and 1/2000 does not matter.

  • Igor

    Not the most critical parameter of the camera, but I am for having the fastest shutter speeds. Alternatively, you can at least 1/6000 like the Pentax k-50.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2015/01/4000-vs-8000/comment-page-1/?replytocom=87429

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2015/01/4000-vs-8000/comment-page-1/?replytocom=87429