Joe Urmos wrote:
>
> Things have been getting dull around here with everyone preoccupied with
> Mike's questions.
>
> Here's one thing Bryan Geyer has to say about tripods:
>
> Why is a tripod essential?
>
> Because blur due to lens movement is inevitable at any shutter
> speed slower than 1/1000 sec., and because it promotes greater
> care in composition.
There are lots of good photos waiting to be taken. Many of them won't
need a tripod to be effective, and many of them *couldn't* be taken if a
tripod was thrown into the equation.
> Handholding is strictly for dead photographers:
> A human pulse beat will cause 200 microns (about 0.008 inch)
> displacement for 1/10th second. Assuming a shutter speed of
> 1/250th sec., this movement alone will cause a 22% loss of
> resolution with a system that is otherwise capable of reproducing
> 100 lines-per-mm (lpm). And at a shutter speed of 1/125th sec.,
> this performance would degrade to only 53 lpm-a 47% waste of
> what you purchased. (Refer John B. Williams: Image Clarity,
> page 191)
The is gear-weenie-speak.
>
> If you don't recognize the name, he runs Really Right Stuff.
Guess he probably has a stake in this.
"Technique is a means, not a goal." - David Vestal
I usually hate quotes, but Vestal is just so damned quotable.
When I started photographing, I followed the advice that a tripod should
be used whenever possible. I'm a pretty healthy guy, so "whenever
possible" translates to just about all the time. I'm slowly weaning
myself off of this and other bad advice I got when starting out. Some
subjects just aren't suitable for tripod work.
Content, not resolution, makes a good photo.
tv
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
