Whats the (shutter)speed limit for handheld LF?

I remember reading somewhere(I think it was a long time ago in

Shutterbug, in an article by Frances Schultz) that there was some

reference as to how slow a shutter speed one could use shooting

handheld that would probably yield an acceptably sharp image. I

think the ISO was factored in somehow. Does anybody have a clue as

to what it is? Thanks!

It depends on your technique, but for non-moving subjects, 1/focal length is the slowest shutter speed you should use hand-held. For moving subjects, you'll need at least 1/twice the focal length.

for 4x5, I just use 1/300th ...

I'll let you know when I can pick mine up and look through it (he says going to the gym).

John,

 

ISO does factor in because the exposure (aperture and shutter speed) is a factor of the ISO.

 

Therefore if one were to take a 4X5 with a 135 mm lens the slowest hand held shutter speed would be 1/125 second. Therefore,if we took an example of using TriX (which I rate at 160) and for the sake of argument using the sunny F16 rule. This film at the rating that I have tested it, under bright sunlit conditions, would expose at 1/160 at F16.

 

Obviously faster or slower films and differing lighting conditions would all affect the calculations above.

ISO doesn't really matter, except that a faster film lets you use a shorter exposure speed.

 

The frequently quoted "1/focal length" applies to 35mm, not LF: Since a LF negative needs much less enlargement than a 35mm negative to produce the same size print, more movement is tolerable.

 

My only experience with this was shooting handeld with a Technika III 5x7", with a Xenar 300mm/f:4.5 lens. Shutter speed was 1/75, since that is the fastest speed on that shutter (Compound #5). Sharpness was acceptable for a 8x10" print... In this case, the weight of the camera contributes to the stability: 7kg camera plus 1kg lens isn't going to shake much, just move slowly downwards as my arms weaken!

 

I wouldn't try that slow a speed with a 35mm camera with a 300mm lens, but the equivalent focal length in 35mm would be 75mm or thereabouts.

 

This has been discussed before - there's a picture of me with my handheld 5x7" in one of those discussions ;)

Isn't the 1/focal length rule mainly optimized for 35mm? Since 4x5 can generally tolerate a larger circle of confusion it seems you should also be able to get away with a slower shutter speed than predicted by 1/FL. Remembering that a 135mm lens on 4x5 is roughly equivalent to 45mm on a 35mm camera, I'd think you could at least use 1/60th second if you're reasonably steady. IMO, of course, and I haven't tried it. YMMV.

I can only say, you must try it. It is camera and operator dependent. But, I would disagree (somewhat) with 1/focal length for LF.

 

The 1/f.l. "rule" is best fit for 35mm and MF. Assuming you held the camera exactly as still (or motionful), the 4X5 negative is enlarged less, so more blur would be acceptable, assuming all motion artifacts are linear (however, actually, it all depends, for larger format, how much rotational movement you have when you click the shutter). But, as far as an object moving across the film plane, a 150mm lens in 4X5 should be like a 35-50 mm lens in 35mm, so you should be able to tease 1/30th or 1/60th, despite a 150mm lens. The object will move the same percent of the negative, in any format, for lenses of similar field of view, similar camera motion, similar subject movements. Plus, the inertia of a large camera body may actually inhibit motion (emphatically so), and the leaf shutter is less prone to cause camera motion than is a focal plane in a small body.

 

So, try it and see -- it depends on subject matter, your tolerance for blur (which depends on enlargement), your camera, your shooting habits. I have "gotten away" with 1/15th on an old speed graphic, 135mm lens, 8x10 enlargement-- no visible blur (you will hear many stories of that ilk), but would really rather prefer as fast as my lens can reliably give, and a tripod, if I am after real tack sharp results. Also seems as though 1/5-1/10-1/15th is about as slow as people photography can use, before the subject's motion comes into play. That's from Old Literature, but I accept it.

Ole-

 

Less enlargement, sure, but the film area is also bigger. My experience is that handheld 4x5 needs higher speeds.

Keep in mind that the large-format press cameras (Graflex, Busch, et al) were <b>made</b> to be used hand-held, and most often were used that way. Lotsa sharp pictures resulted.

David- No doubt! I really like using my graflex...

 

But it is pretty different than 35mm...

F/8 and be there . . . (with flash bulbs and a cigar). ;-)

 

I'd agree with the reciprocal of the focal length for standard 35mm SLRs, a bit slower for rangefinders, and maybe a bit slower for press cameras, too. I did an 8-second hand held shot with a Bronica once, but I've also blurred shots at 1/250 with the 'Blad.

<<but I've also blurred shots at 1/250 with the 'Blad>>

 

Yes ralph-

 

That will happen if you are spinning in circles while exposing :)

I routinely use my 4X5 Linhof Technika hand held, mostly with either a 90mm or a 135mm lens. My standard shutter speed is 1/60, and the negs enlarge very well to 16X20", 20X24" and even 30X40".

 

With a monopod you can obtain excellent results at 1/15 and 1/30. In a pinch you can get acceptable results hand-held at these shutter speeds as well.

 

Remember, these 4X5 press cameras were made to be used hand-held. As Weegee said: "f8 and be there...".

 

So forget the zone system, use an incident light meter, and be spontaneous. You will be amazed with the results.

Why not slap on a roll of 120/220 (assuming you have a roll film back available) and see for yourself? With slide film you can look at the developed images on a light table and decide what works for you. The advantage of this is that you'll learn the slowest speed that's acceptable for you and also improve your technique for taking hand-held photos. It's also a pretty cheap lesson with 120 film.

I just got done developing some 5x7 B&W film that I shot handheld with a Anba 5x7 and a f12 110mm Perigon and a 250mm Fuji SF. There is a small graveyard with very old gravestones that was left unmowed and very picturesque with the tall grass etc. Anyway, I left the pod home and forgot my meter too and thought I was going to shoot like with a Speed Graphic, boy was I wrong. It was hard to focus in the bright light with no gg hood. The darkcloth made it possible....just. I was going between a 60th and 125th and came away thinking that this was a total waste of time. So...happily to my surprise all the negs were sharp and well composed and ones with the 250 very painterly at f11. So it is possible to have decent results this way. BTW I have gotten very sharp pics at a 15th with the Graphic and a 127mm lens too. The nice part about the Anba and the Perigon is it weighs just about 4 lbs and the camera even closes with the lens in place it is so small. Next time I'll bring the pod though but it's nice to know you don't have to.

1/focal length is a rough guide, but, like acceptable focus, it depends on what circle of confusion you think is acceptable.

 

Using LF hand held today seems as practical and useful as cival war battle re-enactment - if you only want a 10 x 8 picture - why use a 5 x 4 camera...? grain-free panned sports photography?

 

If you need the freedom of hand-holding to follow the subject, you might be able to use a shutter-beam and an an electronic shutter on a tripod.

 

I used to use a 640mm lens @ 1/125, but that was 35mm, it was 640mm long, and has two pistol grips and a shoulder but, and I used it lying down like a rifle, or for birds in flight.

Hi everybody,<br>

IMHO, the first criteria for hand-held shots is the overall weight of the gear.

<br>

I currently use my Linhof Master Technika with focusing rangefinder at 1/60 (1/15 with a monopod) without any problem.<br>

<br>

Don't forget that the the 1/focal length rule is for cameras without bellows focusing.<br>

<br>

On these cameras, from 35mm to 6x7 with interchangeable lenses, the flange focal distance, i.e. the distance between the lens and the film is realised by means of the lens length. Thus, the longer the lens, the heavier.<br>

<br>

On the contrary, with a bellows camera, the difference of weight between a wide angle and a tele is not as important, and the flange distance is applicated by moving the bellows.<br>

<br>

So the weight of these lenses is not the most determinent factor.<br>

<br>

I think that the overall weight of a folding camera with lens and roll-film holder is rather a constant data.<br>

<br>

Nevertheless, I consider that hand-held shooting is more secure and comfortable with a monopod.<br>

John, I remember Walter Heun, the veteran Leica School instructor stating that the 1/focal length rule of thumb applied to thirty year olds. I'm not that steady at 53, or else I am pickier about sharpness.

 

My Crown Graphic has a selonoid mounted on the lens. With the proper cord, the shutter can be tripped by gently pushing a button on the flash unit. This, of course, was originally designed to synch M bulbs to the X shutter. However, it also makes a very jar free way to release the shutter. My guess is the selonoid release might get you a shutter speed or two.

This question takes me back very many years. I used to feel comfortable shooting at rather low shutter speeds with a Graflex SLR. With a large camera held at eye level, I would have been more concerned about possible shake.

Not fer nuthin, but a B.A. Honkin Graphic Advenger should be able to hold 1/8 second and print to 20x24. Sharp enough to cut your eye in a single bound.

I've read that article a number of times. It shows Roger holding the camera on

his shoulder. I believe they mention 1/15 to 1/8th and that some people even

could hold to 1 sec for a useable picture, not necessairly sharp, just useable.

 

I use to shoot a 90mm handheld and I would hold it pressed to my body,

Since I was shooting in daylight and 400 iso film I could get a higher shutter

speed. For iso 100 in overcast I think the old string trick attached to the bottom

of the camera or using a monopod (with shoulder brace, chest strap etc)

would work easily to the lower speeds. I like my Graphic on my bogen

automatic monopod for carrying purposes over the shoulder. With the Graphic

tho, it's also quite easy to hold it against something like a wall or just setting it

down. One thing I've found helpful is some sort of wedge to stick under the

camera for level, if like on a bridge. I think a small beanbag is perferable but I

have used rocks when shooting on top mountains as well.

This question takes me way back. I used to feel comfortable shooting at rather slow speed with a Graflex SLR. With a large eye-level camera I would have been more concerned about possible camera shake.

Here we go again:<div></div>

John, Edward Weston shot some of his finest nudes indoors, with available light, hand holding a 4x5 Graphlex.

Of course he never enlarged and his formula for exposure was tested over time.

You have to admit that he produced a brilliant body of work hand holding a 4x5. It certainly can be done, but it's not easy.

Have fun trying, I'm currently lubing up the collapsible legs on my tripod.