Paulus Posted January 12, 2015 Share #41 Posted January 12, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) With the M I have never once used a tripod with the MDA camera. But normally my main goal is shooting people ( does that sound right? ) . If the shutter speed comes under 1/30 than it's no use anyway I think. On the other hand, a tripod would be good against any vibration. That's why I alway try to shoot at the highest speed possible. If I can above 1/250 or more with a 50mm. I use a monopod very frequently with my heavy gear Nikon D3+ 300mm lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Hi Paulus, Take a look here Are Tripods Really Necessary?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NJH Posted January 12, 2015 Share #42 Posted January 12, 2015 I use a monopod very frequently with my heavy gear Nikon D3+ 300mm lens. Its funny I asked a guy years ago how he got that fantastic background blur which conveys speed by panning the camera yet the race car stayed nice and sharp. He said one word, monopod. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanyasi Posted January 14, 2015 Share #43 Posted January 14, 2015 FWIT, I use a tripod for landscape and architectural photography. I was just in NYC. Given the purpose of the trip and what I was already carrying I didn't carry a tripod. Got some nice shots without it--sunrise and fading afternoon sun. However, I would have had more keepers had I brought my tripod. Like most people, there are times when I don't use it, but I almost always regret it. For me, a tripod makes a noticeable difference. It is particularly useful in cold weather when my fingers are stiff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted January 15, 2015 Share #44 Posted January 15, 2015 Its funny I asked a guy years ago how he got that fantastic background blur which conveys speed by panning the camera yet the race car stayed nice and sharp. He said one word, monopod. While wrestling with the tripod issue, don't overlook the monopod. A good, sturdy monopod can make a huge difference when using an M camera. With a 50mm lens wide open at 1/60 or slower, you will be surprised at what a difference a monopod will make compared to hand holding the shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted March 7, 2015 Share #45 Posted March 7, 2015 I relish tripods. They help reduce the tyranny of continually holding, carrying, your camera. Set up, the camera maintains perspective and focus. This allows fine tuning of the image and slows one down...it is much more contemplative. Another benefit...my images are much sharper, and I can use low ISO.. I tie pink flagging tape around one of the legs to avoid tripping over it. And always put the rig in a corner out of all harms way. The Leica looks nice on a good tripod. The excellent time delay shutter release, coupled with the Bulb setting, is a Leica classic for long exposures. Nikon cable releases fit the old and new shutter release threads, which have apparently changed a little over time, making some cable releases unusable. I have several Manfrottos from tabletop to "befree". The Manfrotto 785B is junk, and the cheapest Manfrotto made...avoid. A nice light one is the "Manfrotto befree" for around the house, or car-boot travel. The table top Manfrotto is truly excellent. At least the "Art 190" for a bit of serious stability outside, and in light winds. No tripod works in high winds. This may help dispel the myth. Next myth "Leica photographers don't use flash"... that one came from a well known camera blogger! cheers Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 7, 2015 Share #46 Posted March 7, 2015 If the only camera you use is 35mm, then a tripod is good for exposures longer than, for example, 1/60. If you own, or can own a larger format then ditch 35mm and enjoy an enormous increase in quality beyond the little format. There are MF cameras even more portable than the Leica M. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted March 7, 2015 Share #47 Posted March 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... There are MF cameras even more portable than the Leica M.. Which ones Pico?? Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 7, 2015 Share #48 Posted March 7, 2015 6x7 Plaubel, Fuji, Voigtlander folders for modern cameras, Zeiss Ikonta, Voigtlander, Agfa folders for older cameras. They all slip into a coat pocket. A 6x7 or a 6x9 negative gives a massive increase in quality and even if you are pushing the film any increase in grain has a minimal impact at normal print sizes, unlike 35mm where it becomes a feature of the image. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted March 7, 2015 Share #49 Posted March 7, 2015 Eh? Think we are talking tripods here fellas, not format sizes, how cameras fit in pockets or image-quality characteristics...? Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted March 7, 2015 Share #50 Posted March 7, 2015 I think they mean the slight blur induced at the borderline shutter speeds is less apparent when printing a large negative such as 6x7 to the same output size as from a 35mm negative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 8, 2015 Share #51 Posted March 8, 2015 And they don't have focal plane shutters which reduces vibration and bounce considerably. The bigger size also makes them easier to hold steady although they are not always heavier than a miniature format camera which can work the other way. But when it comes to tripods a medium format folder with a leaf shutter can be used on a travel tripod. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2015 Share #52 Posted March 8, 2015 Eh?Think we are talking tripods here fellas, not format sizes, how cameras fit in pockets or image-quality characteristics...? Dave S Short answer: If one shoots 35mm from a tripod, he could use MF instead; MF has enormously gratifying outcomes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orient XI Posted March 8, 2015 Share #53 Posted March 8, 2015 Long answer ( in all senses of the word) — I use a tripod when using a 560mm Telyt on a Visoflex; a medium format man using a 6 × 7 would need an 1193mm lens to obtain the same magnification (in relation to the film diagonal). If this lens had a maximum aperture of f/5.6 (like my Telyt) it would have a minimum sized front element of 213mm! In this case he would need not only a tripod but a strong assistant. Even in my mid-seventies I can carry the Telyt and a tripod on six mile (10km) photo expeditions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted March 10, 2015 Share #54 Posted March 10, 2015 Ok, tripod is sometimes a must, no doubt. But after that we must ask ourselves: which head is the most convenient one? For me there is only one answer: the d4 by Arca-Swiss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted March 10, 2015 Share #55 Posted March 10, 2015 Ok, tripod is sometimes a must, no doubt.But after that we must ask ourselves: which head is the most convenient one? For me there is only one answer: the d4 by Arca-Swiss. I've only had my D4 geared head for two weeks and I already know it's the last tripod head I will ever need. Fabulous. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted March 12, 2015 Share #56 Posted March 12, 2015 ... the d4 by Arca-Swiss.Will not buy any more Arca-Swiss ballheads as they are now basically welding their clamps to the top of them. You can't get them off if you don't like them (which I don't). A real pity as the Z1 is the best head I've owned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 21, 2015 Share #57 Posted March 21, 2015 I use a tripod for night cityscape shots and landscape. As long exposure makes water look far more appealing. And most importantly, a tripod allows you to retain low ISO. Which is all the more important for landscapes as they always involve much post processing, to retain the colour and dynamic range at low ISOs is vital. Ok, tripod is sometimes a must, no doubt.But after that we must ask ourselves: which head is the most convenient one? For me there is only one answer: the d4 by Arca-Swiss. I don't worry about the head that much. As long as it does it's job of holding the camera steady and can be moved without too much fuss! I will use a Gorillapod as it I can easily fit it a small camera bag. Or a Manfrotto Carbon Fibre tripod. Which is small and lightweight, I can easily carry it to shots on the train and ferry (the advantage of living in a big city that is also full of great natural landscapes, they are very accessible via the cities public transport system) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted March 21, 2015 Share #58 Posted March 21, 2015 I don't like using tripods wherever possible. I prefer a more fluid approach to taking photographs, but sometimes it is clearly not optional, but essential. It depends on how you shoot and what you like. What I will say is that cameras like the Monochrom make not using a tripod easier than ever before, because of the higher base ISO and amazing quality that goes with it. There is a point with shutter speeds where the results of shooting hand held match those from using a tripod. Its not as high as you might think, especially with wide angles. So what's the result of my approach to avoiding tripods wherever possible? well, I own six Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted March 21, 2015 Share #59 Posted March 21, 2015 There is a point with shutter speeds where the results of shooting hand held match those from using a tripod. Its not as high as you might think, especially with wide angles. So what's the result of my approach to avoiding tripods wherever possible? well, I own six 1 / 2xFL perhaps as the crossing point? half that to be sure? I have read elsewhere the opinion that 1/250 does the job with the big clanky 6x6 and 6x7 cameras that are reckoned by many to be tripod biassed cameras. This last question is of special interest to me as I getting GAS for one of those beasts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted March 21, 2015 Share #60 Posted March 21, 2015 Good enough? 2x maybe. To match a tripod 4x or 6x, for me. But personally I'd rather have a tripod and the full range of shutter speeds available and be able to shoot at lower ISOs where the dynamic range is best. Plus I'm a fan of the Lee Big Stopper. A tripods friend, that one is. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.