Shutter speed for short tele

[heavy]

Hi,

 

I'm considering purchasing a short tele, i.e. 90mm most likely (75 'cron and 'lux are just

too expensive for me). One important application would be available light (=window lit)

portraits, where I often seem to end up with exposures around 1/30@f/2.8. I'm wondering

whether to go for a Summicron or Tele-Elmarit (again, 'lux is too expensive). Price is

obviously one issue, but I'm also unsure whether it is possible to get sharp enough

pictures with a short tele at such shutter speeds. Any comments/recommendations?

 

Regards,

Henrik

[heavy]

Perhaps I should have mentioned that it's LTM/M that I'm talking about. With an SLR I

prefer 1/90 with a 85mm lens.

 

Regards,

Henrik

[al_kaplan1]

If you're relaxed, practice your breathing, brace your elbows against your sides, you should be able to get pretty consistantly sharp photos at 1/30 with a 90mm lens.

[terry_rory]

If sharpness is important to you then 1/125th and use 400 or 800 film. Sharp and a little grainy is OK. If freezing movement and/or expression is important then again 1/125th sec.

 

If sharpness is not critical for the look you prefer then 1/30th sec should be fine. I personally do not believe all of the "how slow I can go" claims that I see written about. I would consider 1/30th sec handheld with a 50mm lens the absolute limit if some degree of sharpness is to be evident on a 12x8 print viewed at normal distance. (But would prefer 1/60th sec) It may sound wimpy amongst such legendary 'slow hands' but I prefer to keep to the old guideline of 1/focal length in mm and then round up to the next fastest speed.

 

However you know your steadiness better than I do. What are you comfortable with? I would prefer a heavier camera at slower speeds. There is a lot to be said for a bit of mass.

[Rob F.]

Let's go at it this way: How slow can you go with your 50? Just double that figure and you will have a rough idea of your slowest speed with the 90. To be clear about what I mean by doubling the speed, if you can shoot at 1/15 with a 50 and get a sharp enough picture, then you can use 1/30 with the 90. If your safe speed is 1/30 with the 50, you can probably get away with 1/50 with the 90.

[Rob F.]

Another thought: a used 90 Summicron is not all that expensive. With some careful shopping you can get one for close to what you pay for a tele-Elmarit. The 90 Cron is an excellent portrait lens! And since it is a bit heavy, it will sit more solid in your hand, improving your steadiness.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Here is 1/250 second with a Leica M3; 135mm F3.5 LTM Nikkor; Tri-x ; cropped section of 35mm a negative.<BR><BR>Do some testing; results will vary with each person; and have more scatter at lower shutter speeds.<BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/hockey/tripods-456.jpg">

[jeremy_tok]

Hand holdability is a factor not just of focal length but also of object distance. Will someone prove me wrong on this?

[SCL]

An old axiom for handholdability is that with good technique (as mentioned above) one should be able to get reasonably sharp pictures at the reciprocal of the focal length of the lens used. i.e. if you're using a 90mm lens, you should be ok at about 1/90 sec.

[richie chishty]

Henrik:

 

If you are in the USA, then Leica 90mm Summicrons can be bought for $600 -$1000, depending on the condition and lens version. The 90mm/f2 ASPH is more expensive. Here's one 90mm f2 lens you might like:

 

http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT.CFM?CRID=11523275&SKID=LM0601000011006&SID=newused&BID=LM&CID=06&SOID=N&curpic=0&dpsp=0

 

Another (less expensive) option is a Leica 135mm/f4 Tele-Elmar lens like this one here:

 

http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT.CFM?CRID=11523275&SKID=LM0601000011006&SID=newused&BID=LM&CID=06&SOID=N&curpic=0&dpsp=0

[richie chishty]

Sorry! Here's the link for the 135mm lens.

 

http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT.CFM?CRID=11523275&SKID=LM0600007650006&SID=newused&BID=LM&CID=06&SOID=N&curpic=0&dpsp=0

[e_b7]

In addition to moving hands, subjects move too. You'll probably have more than your share of throw-aways with a telephoto lens, slow shutter speed, hand-holding and portaits.

 

I've thought this through myself, and decided to stick with a 50mm in low-light handheld portraits. If you don't move closer than a torso-up shot, the subjects face won't be distorted. You can crop later to get a head shot.

 

Provided your subject stays still (e.g. these are not candid shots), a compact tripod will go a long way to improve the results without changing the look of your photographs. I agree that the 1/focal length rule for hand-holding is a good one. Telephoto lenses need lots of light, fast film, or a tripod, or some combination of the three. A monopod might help too.

[frank granovski]

The 90mm F4 (Leica CL/Minolta CLE versions) are great lenses for the money. I paid $320 Canadian for mine. In the US you should be able to fine one in nice shape between $200 and $300.

[harry__florida_]

In such situations I find it very helpful to use a "chestpod" made up of a Leica table tripod plus ball head. It provides good stability not obtainable with mere hand-holding of the camera and collapses out of the way when not in use while still attached. Makes a big difference even at higher shutter speeds.

[al_kaplan1]

The Leica table top tripod can be held against your chest but it can also be pressed against a wall, tree trunk, even the ceilng, to get nice sharp photos.

[heavy]

Thank's for your responses.

 

I am aware of the old rule-of-thumb about the reciprocal of focal length. In my

experience, rangefinders & 35mm lenses (only focal length I have expreience with) seem

to defy that rule but probably that's just the missing mirror slap. I have usually been

satisfied with exposures at 1/15 and sometimes even with 1/8 (better than no picture at

all) so I guess I'm not that obsessed with absolute sharpness. Subject movement is

obviously a separate matter.

 

Regards,

Henrik

[blakley]

My windowlight portrait in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cs0B">this thread</a> was taken at 1/125 @ f/2. I also shot some at 1/60, but not all of them are sharp. This was with the Summicron 75. I can handhold a 50mm lens down to 1/30 with excellent sharpness about 85% of the time, so it surprised me how much harder it was to handhold the 75 at 1/60. I guess I need to practise.

<p>

(BTW if you read the whole thread, I finally figured out that the 75 cron's hood locks by turning it about an eighth of a turn clockwise as you look at the front element - that's what I get for not reading the manual).

[albert_smith]

<I>around 1/30@f/2.8...</I><P>

 

<I>...but I'm also unsure whether it is possible to get sharp enough pictures with a short tele at such shutter speeds. Any comments/recommendations?</I><P>

 

I use a 90mm Elmarit M as my short telephoto. It helps that this lens is very good at f/2.8, so I never feel I need to stop down to get the best performance. My record over time is that I can get fairly good results at 1/30th <I><B>if</B></I> I am shooting horizontally. Verticals are harder for me to hold steadily with an M camera (I do great with SLRs) because of the off center viewing and off-balance feel with the longer than normal lens.<div></div>

[albert_smith]

and one more, this time elbows not braced...<div></div>