do you use tripods when taking pictures?

Question

i have a nikon dslr camera and i like taking night shots with natural lighting so i lower the shutter speed, problem is the images are blurry when the shutter is long. can a tripod help?

Answer 1

a tripod is ideal. But you can use a bag of rice and set the bag of rice somewhere to stabilize your camera.

Answer 2

The normal 'rule' is that you can hand hold reasonably safely and take images without camera shake in proportion to the focal length of the lens:
30mm = 1/30th of a second
60mm = 1/60th of a second
... etc.

You can get away with a stop or two longer if you have very steady hands (which comes with practice, and as fhotoace says, potential wastage). You can also use longer shutter speeds (normally up to 2 stops, so 30mm lens at 1/8th of a second) when you are using an image stabilised lens, but you need to be aware that this doesn't compensate for subject movement, just camera movement.

Yes, definitely to the tripod suggestion, many pro photographers say this is THE most useful accessory, and so this will ensure your images are sharp. I'd suggest you get a sturdy but light model if possible - carbon fibre versions are great and in my view well worth the cost (if it's that or my back, then I'll carry as little weight as possible!).

The next thing will be to decide on the kind of head you need for the pod:
I'd suggest 'pan and tilt' if you need to work accurately, but the flip side is that they are relatively slow to use.
So, if people are also in your sights, I'd suggest a trigger grip type instead, which is very fast to use.

This should solve your blurring problems - but if you use image stabilised lenses remember to turn the stabilisation off when shooting with a tripod.

Answer 3

It Depends on the lighting.. when you're talking a picture of car in the day, of course you're not going to need to use a tripod, because most likely, you would use a shutter speed that was above 1/50, and little to no blur would become a part of the image itself. when it comes to fireworks, which are mainly set off in the night, you SHOULD use a tripod because of the low shutter speeds you'll most likely have to use ( 1/10-15" ), depending on the effect you want to accomplish. When you're taking pictures of fireworks, you have to put down the shutter because of how dark it will most likely be. However, if they do them in the day, you wouldn't have to use a tripod. Also, photographers use tripods to keep certain things in frame, and the make the shot look even and straight, and not look as hand-held, even in well-lit studios they use tripods, not because it's dark, but to make sure the subject moves into frame and THEY don't have to move it into frame.

Answer 4

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c317/wtin/0c9c2751.jpg

You have some great answers here already, so I won't add much, except some photos to show you.

Above photos are of LA-taken from Griffith Observatory. I used a tripod as the shutter speed was 1.5 seconds.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c317/wtin/88f39eeb.jpg

Now this one here was shot with Canon 100 - 400 mm f 435-5.6 L IS indoor, ISO 3,200 at 400 mm at f 5.7 at 1/125 (I think) with no tripod. In this case, IS really helped.

The other person stated that the slowest shutter speed is double the focal length--that is actually not .. correct. The slowest shutter speed possible for hand-holding without noticeable blur due to camera shake is to take the reciprocal of the effective focal length of the lens. So if it's a 400 mm lens, it should be 1/400, and so on.

I use a Tiltall. It's ugly, and heavy, but it works.

Answer 5

Of course a tripod is best, but sometimes you find yourself "out there" without one and you have to improvise.

One key trick - even when using a tripod - is to set the self-timer for 10 seconds. If you have the camera on a tripod, this gives it time to stop shaking after you release the shutter button. If you DON'T have the camera on a tripod, it gives you time to really brace yourself and take a deep breath before the shutter activates.

Read the captions under these images to see how long the exposure was and what sort of bracing I used when I didn't have a tripod.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/2130585450/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/2119933026/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/2084567023/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/856121089/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/441244806/

Do what you can to get the shot, but - YES - use a tripod if you can plan ahead and carry it with you!

Answer 6

If you’re on the lookout for some really sharp images, you need to use a tripod. Of course you can get sharp images with a handheld camera, but it just requires extremely fast shutter speeds or the use of a flash. A good rule of thumb is that it requires about twice the focal length in fractions of a second to hold a camera still.

That means that a 50mm (film equivalent) lens requires 1/100th of a second to be steady and a 200mm roughly requires 1/500th. The factor also depends on the movement of the subject and on how steady your grip is. My own experience is that a factor around four is more like it and if you really want sharpness a shutter speed of 1/1000th or 1/2000th of a second is good. As your focal length grows—when you zoom in or change to a telephoto lens—this demand rises, and at really long focal lengths like 300-500 mm on a 35 mm film camera, there are only slim chances of holding the camera still Now, most small cameras don’t even reach these short shutter speeds and even if they did, the light required for such fast speeds is rarely there.

The solution to that is a tripod. And make that a steady one

Answer 7

I'm with dodol on this. You just can't always take a tripod with you. I was out with my family last night at a new outdoor shopping center, where the crowds and activity would make it difficult to set up a tripod. And parking was full, so we were way way out. And we had dinner at a crowded restaurant that we had to wait an hour for, so a tripod would have had other restaurant patrons tripping over me.

But I did find a few good light poles to lean on, so I got a few good images. Fill-flash helped where there was nothing to lean on, or the activity was just too fast to capture, even with a tripod.

Answer 8

For night photography, a tripod will be a great help! Your images are blurred due to movements during the longer exposure time. Definately need a tripod, most night photographer even use a cable release to ensure that the camera is perfectly still throughout the entire duration.

Answer 9

The basic function of Tripod is to reduce the chances of camera movement,when taking shots at low shutter speeds.Use of tripod,in such shots, results in sharper picture eliminating the chances of blur. But keep in mind,if the object moves,the tripod in such situation cannot be of any help.

Answer 10

Yes you need one for the type of photography you described. To second what Ace said, don't get a cheap one, get the best you can afford, it should long out last the camera and be reliable and flexible enough for most situations. The cheap ones are so flimsy they move more than your hand would with the slightest breeze or vibration from a passing car.

Edit: In a pinch with no pod I've braced against a tree or a rock, even the roof of my pickup.

Answer 11

I'm ridiculously lazy when it comes to tripod. It's bulky, it's heavy and it takes time to set things up.

So usually I would not bring my tripod if it's for night shots. Instead, I'll just get my fast lens, and look for something to prop my camera on site - anything works. Fire hydrant, electrical pole, even a tree.

Its doesn't always work - but it's a trade off I'm willing to do.