Improve sharpness with burst shooting?

[Guest badbob]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I haven't done a formal experiment with this technique, but recently I did several burst shots where each burst was about 6 images (before lockup due to writing out to the card, I suppose), and each shot was at 1/30 second. It seemed to me that I got a better percentage of sharp images than what I would have gotten taking them one at a time as I normally do. Comments?

[Nicoleica]

It could be due to any shake, induced when you pressed the shutter, having dissipated during your burst of shots.

[prk60091]

thorsten overgaard in his voluminous and informative D2 site advocates the burst method exactly for the reason Nicole suggests and he has examples proving it to be a "best practice".

 

If you read his tips and tricks alot of the tips and tricks that were/are applicable to the D2 are valid for the X1.....

 

i have modified his tip - i bracket and therefore i get +1 / -1 and spot on (per the camera)... less to do in post- i prefer shooting in jpg only (yes I know i may miss some details in the darker portions of the image) (yes i know it is heresy to not shoot in raw)... but i know me..... if i had to process 36 shots (eg 1 "roll" of film) it may be 2-3 weeks before i did that-- whereas i pick 1 of the 3 images i like the most and up it goes

[bill]

Yup, a machine-gun requires far less skill than a rifle. Just hose your target down.

 

You'll be able to nail hundreds of "decisive moments" and just pick your favourite at your leisure when sitting in front of your screen later.

 

...or you could learn to use your camera properly...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[prk60091]

Yup, a machine-gun requires far less skill than a rifle. Just hose your target down.

 

You'll be able to nail hundreds of "decisive moments" and just pick your favourite at your leisure when sitting in front of your screen later.

 

...or you could learn to use your camera properly...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

3 shots does not equal machine gun

 

do you mean to tell me - you have never bracketed a shot? film or digital? ever? i learned to bracket exposures about 35-40 years ago. When I did it then it was as my dad showed for "important" shots.... i did it my manipulating the shutter speeds- now it is easier and always guarantees that the image I want is recorded..

 

i guess post processing in lightroom/photoshop/aperture means you haven't learned to use your camera properly either.... otherwise why manipulate curves or levels?

[Nicoleica]

I think that camera shake is becoming more of a problem with 'compact' digital cameras nowadays.

 

So very few have viewfinders (Optical or electronic.), and so people have to adopt the zombie position, rather than holding the camera securely with their eye to the finder. This is the main reason that I sold my DL4 and bought a Nikon P6000. It's also the primary reason that I have not purchased an X1, despite the many other advantages of the X1.

 

I know that you can add an external viewfinder to cameras such as the DL4 and X1, but those do have some limitations compared to a built-in viewfinder.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

From my experience...even in Zombie mode the X1 allows slower handheld shutter speeds due to the leaf shutter. My stance with the X1 is kind of half zombie, half traditional. I hold my camera the way I'd hold an M8 and then put it in front of my eyes by 5-7 inches so I can see the LCD. Too many people hold P&S cameras between their thumbs and pointer fingers with arms stretched stiff...well, like a zombie (I like that Nicole).

[h00ligan]

Bill, maybe it's time to remove the gentleman amateur and Leica ambassador from your signature?

[bill]

Edward,

 

Maybe it's time people learned basic good practice instead of relying on technological crutches and covering up their inadequacies behind ad hominiem attacks.

[phancj]

From my experience...even in Zombie mode the X1 allows slower handheld shutter speeds due to the leaf shutter. My stance with the X1 is kind of half zombie, half traditional. I hold my camera the way I'd hold an M8 and then put it in front of my eyes by 5-7 inches so I can see the LCD. Too many people hold P&S cameras between their thumbs and pointer fingers with arms stretched stiff...well, like a zombie (I like that Nicole).

 

Honestly who gives a ratass about the posture as long as you are comfortable and an nail a good shot. The final image says it all...

 

But I also do it the way you do, unless it is a shot from a low level in which case I have to adopt a sorta cramped zombie position with my arms stretched below instead of forward?!

 

I find it strange that some would think a certain position is more superior or smacks more of a serious photographer...to each his own, more power to the guy who can snap an award winning shot doing a one-hand handstand:p

 

The final image says it all...

[Nicoleica]

Phancj, I don't think that anyone here was criticising any particular stance or method. I certainly was not intending too do such. But we were trying to explain that unless you hold your camera in a stable position, you may tend to suffer more from blurred pictures due to camera shake. I believe that this is one reason why so many cameras come with 'Image stabilisation'/'Vibration reduction' mechanisms these days, even for short focal lengths. As Badbob has discovered, using burst mode, the initial picture can be less sharp than subsequent frames as even the act of pressing the shutter can cause unwanted camera movement.

[jaapv]

Bill, I must confess up. When I shoot a static subject at low shutter speed I use a burst and pick the sharpest of the identical shots. Call it sharpness bracketing.

[phancj]

Phancj, I don't think that anyone here was criticising any particular stance or method. I certainly was not intending too do such. But we were trying to explain that unless you hold your camera in a stable position, you may tend to suffer more from blurred pictures due to camera shake. I believe that this is one reason why so many cameras come with 'Image stabilisation'/'Vibration reduction' mechanisms these days, even for short focal lengths. As Badbob has discovered, using burst mode, the initial picture can be less sharp than subsequent frames as even the act of pressing the shutter can cause unwanted camera movement.

 

Haha but must admit that the word zombie does conjure negative imagery .....

[bad robot]

Might some a bit odd, but in 40 years of photography I have never bracketed a shot. Not for any special reason, just not got around to it. I think I might try this with my X1 this afternoon

[phancj]

Might some a bit odd, but in 40 years of photography I have never bracketed a shot. Not for any special reason, just not got around to it. I think I might try this with my X1 this afternoon

 

Never felt the need to, but I guess could be good if it is an all important shot then probably it serves as insurance.

 

But tried it for HDR photography before for fun...

[bill]

The last time I bracketed was back in the early '90's when shooting slide in a Contax RX. Never since.

 

The point is straightforward, and there is no point in some people getting snotty about it. It's a bit like learning to drive. Master good technique first. Learn to steady your shot through good posture, good grip and control of your breathing. Don't snatch shots, press steadily on the shutter release. Direct-vision cameras like the M and add-on viewfinders are an asset in this regard because you get no blackout at the time of taking the shot; you can see any movement, either your subjects or your own, and shoot again if necessary.

 

Above all, use technology as an enabler not a crutch or a mask for poor skills

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[pgk]

From my own practical (ie. I've tried it!) experience, shooting a number of images in succession (whether as a burst or over a shortish period of time) when you are on the 'edge of the envelope' of what is normally possible shutter-speedwise (and at times way beyond it), MAY yield a shaper image or two. Sometimes its even possible to get a very sharp image. BUT, and its a very big but, there is, in my experience, no guarantee of this. So whilst I can see Bill's point in saying its not good technique, I have to admit that sometimes it does work. As with anything digital, the easiest solution is to try it and see if it works for you.

[phancj]

From my own practical (ie. I've tried it!) experience, shooting a number of images in succession (whether as a burst or over a shortish period of time) when you are on the 'edge of the envelope' of what is normally possible shutter-speedwise (and at times way beyond it), MAY yield a shaper image or two. Sometimes its even possible to get a very sharp image. BUT, and its a very big but, there is, in my experience, no guarantee of this. So whilst I can see Bill's point in saying its not good technique, I have to admit that sometimes it does work. As with anything digital, the easiest solution is to try it and see if it works for you.

 

Actually it sounds quite logical...gonna try it to see if I get even more biting sharp images...need a larger SD though!

[Steve Ash]

I absolutely agree with Jaap. Not every scene has a peek moment. Thus burst shooting is a reasonable approach to reduce camera shake. I do not see what shall be wrong with it and would rather recommend it in those cases. A small tripod would be even better.

 

Regards

Steve

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

I find it strange that some would think a certain position is more superior

Well, holding a camera is a bit like target shooting in that optimised grips/positions tend to be used which minimise movement not in line with the barrel/lens axis, and these are convergent in style;).