Maximum tele length you can shoot handheld?

What is the maximum telephoto length you would be comfortable shooting
handheld, with IS as well as steadying your arm with elbow on a railing
etc, but no tripod? Thanks.

 

Depends on the amount of light available as well as the f-stop and
shutter speed needed for proper exposure.
My Panasonic FZ15 has a Tele FL of 432mm (equivalent) and an aperture of
2.8 at full Tele.!!!
On a sunny day, with proper shooting technique (steadying my shoulder
against a tree, suspending breathing while tripping the shutter,
etc.),and using IS, I am comfortable shooting at 1/100 second.
Usually, the AUTO setting selects f=2.8 and lets me shoot at a faster
speed than that.
But in lower light conditions I'm good to go with a minimum speed of
1/100 sec. with a 432 mm FL.
Bob Williams

 

That would greatly depend on the lens. I see some great shots at the end of
a 50-500mm without any image stabilization but I can't do it so it would
also depend on how well you can hold your hands. You should be looking and
asking on some of the binary groups. The birdwatching groups are always
using the big guns.

Jon

 

With no IS, no support, ~350mm (35mm equivalents)
With no IS, bracing on a steady object, ~350-750mm
With IS, no support, ~500mm up to 1-second shutter speed.
With IS, with support, >500mm

I doubt you will find that being anywhere near the norm for the vast majority of
people that hold a long-FL-lens equipped camera.

I should put up a web-page on the art and techniques that I invented over the
years of successful handheld photography. By using my own methods I found that I
can do tack-sharp handheld shots, no support, with an IS equipped camera, a
432mm (eq.) focal-length lens, at full 1 second exposures.

But then if you all could do what I can do I'd have too much competition in the
variety and quality of photos I can get. It's bad enough that the last person
under my guidance started getting a few rare shots nicer than my own, resulting
in an inner conflict of pride and envy for them.

 

I have occasionally managed to do a handheld 400mm shot, but there are other
days (and subjects) that have noticable camera shake blur much lower than
that. So I would say that the upper limit will depend on the photographer,
the subject, the lighting conditions and what kinds of "supplemental
stabilization" (IS and/or steadying object) are available.

The rule of thumb I have heard is that the shutter speed needs to be 1 over
the FL of the lens or faster for a fully hand held shot. Depending on the
stability of your hands and the type of supplemental support you may be able
to halve the shutter speed, but not much more than that. If conditions won't
allow you to get to that target shutter speed, you may be out of luck. Of
course you will have to experiment for yourself to see how your personal
shooting style and "stability of hands" will effect the target speed.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

 

Impressive, and of course you could only do it using a P&S, as
you've never managed to take a picture you liked using a DSLR.

No need to protect the guilty. We know by now that you can only
be speaking of Baumbadier, the cur. And to think, despite winning
all of those photo awards that you've found so elusive, he has never
given you any credit. You and your compatriots shouldn't stand for
this. You should turn on your abuser, but of course you won't since
everyone knows that sock puppets lack spines. And now the latest :

 

Poor jealous Assaar, he can't be greatness, he can only stick like shit on the
shoe of greatness. It's all he has in life.

 

Depends on you, your technique and your steadyness. I find it easier
to hand hold with a heavier cameras and one I can get my left hand
under the lens. Have a bad time with my Nikon 995 at 150mm, but can
easily hold a 70-210 at 210 on my D200. This also depends on the
weight of the lens, ie the 300 f4 Nikor is considered a handholdable
lens, the 300 f2.8, a much heavier lens is generally put on a tripod.
Hand holdability varies a lot from person to person.

Tom

 

One quick rule of thumb is about the reciprocal of the exposure time.
Now, I find this optimistic- I'd really recommend about half that.
But as the rule of thumb goes, if you can shoot at 1:500 second you
can hand-hold out to 500 mm. As I say, I'd really recommend 250
myself.

As the allowable exposure time increases, you need to reduce the focal
length accordingly.

This value was for 35mm film, so the focal length used is the "35mm
equivalent".

 

My Kodak P850 has a max of about 420mm equiv. It has IS, and I've shot
several times without tripod - no complaints.

 

As others have said, it depends on light level.
Also, as focal length goes up and/or exposure time
lengthens, the percentage of sharp images decreases.
So try multiple images when pushing limits.

Some examples:

1120 mm focal length (35mm equivalent) 1/3000 sec, IS:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/c12.18.2002.IMG_2794.hawk.b-600..html

650 mm focal length (35mm equivalent), 1/1600 sec, IS, very sharp:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/road.runner.c11.29.2005.JZ3F5598.b-700.html

On a support, but 1/10 sec at 1300 mm equivalent, IS;
support moving from a vehicle:
http://www.clarkvision.com/gallerie...reasted.roller.c01.24.2007.JZ3F1500b-700.html

Roger

 

I've seen people pull off successful grab shots with a 500mm f/4 L IS
but this was on cloudless days around noon at airshows where they've
probably got -2/3 to -1EV cranked in for even one less stop of shutter
speed available.

 

Envy will kill you