RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
VailJohnson wrote:
Any reason why you’re shooting these at 1/1000?
My first inclination is to "lower the ISO" and shoot at "lower SS" ... very old school from my chrome days shooting ISO 50. So, it's a reasonable question that came to my mind also ... as I thought it through a bit more.
But, in today's realm (and particularly on the mono, without a BFA), that isn't as necessary as it once was. YET, for me ... old ways die hard, and that was my first thought, too.
But, as time marches on, I find that shooting higher shutter speeds affords me more latitude in my technique ... meaning, back in the day, I either had rock solid technique or I toted a tripod with me, which shooting 1/1000 certainly does not require.
I think the thing to realize here is that with the monochrome body (not the same as converting from BFA), the penalty degradation of shooting the higher ISO is vastly different from that of shooting the BFA's ... meaning the higher ISO is still pretty darn clean, so the matter of SS can be set higher to reduce risk of camera shake (particularly, with those of us in a bit of an aging group). If you "reverse think" this, the ballpark 1.5 stop advantage of the removed BFA would equate to using a SS of about 1/350 down from 1/1000, which may seem as a different "expectation". So, on the mono 1/1000 isn't really "that high" in monochrome body terms.
Young guns with rock steady technique (or using IBIS) ... hold that thought for another 20, 30 or 40 years, and try shooting 1:1 without IBIS. You may find it rather disparaging to realize that you just can't do it the same way that you used to. I know that when I first got some lenses without OIS, I was really shocked at how much I "sucked" at not being able to handhold the way I used to. But, even with refocusing my attention to technique ... well, time takes its toll in a way that doesn't favor us as we age.
On another front (Kent's hypothesis), some of the top tier lighting mfr's (Broncolor / Profoto) have shorter duration cutoffs to provide that "crisper" look, moreover than some of their longer duration counterparts. To this ... it has made me wonder if using the higher shutter speed (sufficient exposure retained) in ambient conditions affords for a crisper image, as well. My testing is inconclusive at this juncture to how much benefit there is with the shorter duration SS, but in the realm of "why not" ... I think it isn't the penalty-inducing issue that the offsetting ISO (again, this was on a monochrome body) used to be. (Oh yeah, I remember 3200 grain.)
My .02 is that the OP with this body has learned that the settings that afford a wide range of latitude for a variety of situations. Could it have been shot at a lower ISO, slower SS ... probably. But, I reckon this is kind of an "f/8 and be there" sort of thing, just on the ISO / SS side of the equation ... allowing for the OP to be more attentive to his comp, than his camera.
I ramble ... 
Just saying, I wondered about the higher ISO / SS too ... but, it is apparent that "no blood, no foul" is in play, because the "proof is in the pudding". 
My guess ... the short answer is "convenience" (similar to "f/8 and be there), with little penalty for doing so ... as afforded by the monochrome body and great glass combo.
Edited on Sep 24, 2023 at 01:45 PM · View previous versions
|
But these new tools just make it easier for me to capture what I am seeing.