Avoiding camera shake and get tack sharp images:

[Albert Sim]

I have been bumping my head, should others also do the same?
What triggered me are the images of ALL good landscape photographers always using a very good tripod and remote shutter release.

Hi Andre,
I agreed with you.

Since the day I got my Manfrotto Tripod 190XPROB, I never left it home whenever and wherever I go photo shootings. Though it's not very light-weight, I just carry it along as I want a sharper image more than anything else.

And just FYI, I too have the "hahnel" Giga T Pro II Wireless Timer Remote for my Nikon and it works well. The only complaint is that its RC unit has an auto shut-off feature that I have to on it again quite frequently. Well... it cost me about USD88/unit.

Albert.

[RobertsMx]

Dave,

Does it make sense shooting in continuous shooting mode when using a remote shutter release? I am trying to think what the reason would be for using a remote release. Is it not primarily to avoid any motion blur? Shooting in continuous mode you have the mirror flapping up to 10 times per second, will that not cause motion blur? Will you be shooting continuous mode in low light conditions?

Agreed for some applications it would be nice to have a remote release that will allow continuous shooting mode. I do not have a remote shutter release, not yet in any case, so I would not know if it will allow continuous mode on my Nikon.
The very first opportunity I have to get to a shop selling those cheapies I am definitely going to buy one. My opinion is that a remote shutter release is not an optional extra for a photographer, it is a MUST have!

Andre, I have one of these inexpensive wireless remotes that works quite well on most occasions, but I also have a wired remote for my Sony A55, which allows me to be completely out of sight at all times, and also offers use of bulb mode. It also allows me to be sitting quite far from the camera (IIRC, 25 ft).

For 10 fps burst mode, I will use the wired remote... in my camera, the mirror doesn't move but even if it did, the solution would be preferred one.

[chauncey]

I would be very disappointed if I would have had to use focus stacking to get an image tack sharp when shooting a 1Ds3.
Is Canon really that bad?

Not at all my friend, but...I would admit to being an anal retentive pixel peeper who loves to use that stacking method for some things that it wasn't designed to do.
The improvement in sharper images doesn't work every time, but when it does, you can see the improvement at 200-400%.
Additionally, let's assume that you have a noisy image, making numerous duplicates and making numerous low level de-noise adjustments followed by stacking usually results in a less noisy image with better clarity than you would achieve with a heavy-handed de-noise using one image.

[rpcrowe]

There are three. The third is radio controlled. The Hahnel, which I use, is radio controlled, not IR, and it is therefore not directional at all.

In actuality, we can subdivide the IR cordless releases into two sub-categories:

Those which use the internal IR trip capabilities of the DSLR. The Canon Rebel cameras always had this capability while the 10D Canon DSLR cameras through the 50D do not have an internal IR triggering capability. When using the internal IR remote; the triggering, the position of the trigger is critical. Usually the IR triggers work best when pointed toward the front of the camera.

Then there are the IR triggers which work with the DSLR cameras that do not have internal IR trigger support (these can also be used on cameras with internal IR triggering). These are two-part triggers: with a sender, and a receiver which is plugged into the port into which a wired cable release is normally attached. The advantage to these type triggers are that they are multi-directional. You can trigger the camera from behind as well as from the front. The disadvantage is that you have the receiver hanging from the camera on a pigtail.

The 7D was the first of the non-Rebel 1.6x crop cameras that also included an integral IR release. While the Rebel type of release is great for self portraits and for shooting a group in which you are included, I will still use the two part IR release for shooting with my 7D because of the multi-directional capability...

Various triggers have various capabilities and some enable you to shoot longer exposures while some triggers incorporate intervalometers...

Finally, of course, when you leave your remote release behind you can effectively use the camera self-timer. The 2-second delay available on some cameras facilitates this...

I have found no problems with using Chinese knock-off remote releases, either wired or remote.

[Dusty]

For those of us with limited budgets a crappy cheap cable release can do the job.

You use that word a lot in your post, "crappy". I think I could put my images against most people using my "crappy" cable release instead of one of those "expensive" IR remotes and I don't think it a must to have one, whether that be cable or IR.
I do have a very good tripod and it's a Manfrotto with a ball head mount, best part of £600, I don't think mine is "crappy".
Dave.

PS: whats wrong in using your self timer on your camera?

[NorthernFocus]

Andre, you started out with a good thread and as stated some good advice for people to think about. It headed downhill when you reacted poorly to others making valid points. I think your OP reflects a narrow perspective based on your style/subject matter. All of what you said is useful in a certain context or under certain conditions. As with most things in life, context makes a difference.

For example in one of your subsequent comments you seemed incredulous regarding why one would need to use a remote shutter release while shooting in continuous shutter mode. It is actually done quite often by for example bird photographers shooting birds returning to a nest to feed chicks. One sets up the tripod, focuses the camera on the appropriate spot, then stands with remote in hand and shoots a burst at a predetermined spot/settings when the bird comes in to land.

Similarly, monopod vs tripod. If one is shooting action subject matter at high shutter speeds, the "pod" is primarily supporting the weight of the equipment and helping with gross camera movement. But camera shake is likely not relevant.

Regarding remote releases, it is ironic that Nikon consumer level bodies have built in IR remote useable with a $15 accessory. The biggest problem I have with it is keeping track of the tiny remote. I found them on Amazon for $9.95 and bought three so I could keep one in every camera bag because I can't keep track of the tiny thing. But for the advanced level bodies there are no low cost OEM alternatives for remote operation. There are some low cost third party alternatives out there but Nikon will dissavow your warranty if they find you're using them. Fotodiox makes an RF release that works from over 60m away and sells for about $70US. It's great. I routinely use it and control it from over 30m distant on the opposite side of dog agility rings so I can shoot from two spots during the event. Of course it also works if you're standing at the camera but want hands off operation. It has full capabilities of the shutter button plus bulb mode. I now use it exclusively on my Nikon bodies that aren't IR capable. The transmitter requires a battery but the receiver operates off of the camera battery.

At the end of the day, this thread serves the intended purpose. Useful information from various perspectives comes forth.

[Colin Southern]

The reason: because we are often to proud to admit that we don't know how to.

I'm not so sure. I've taken the time to pass along the figures needed on many occasions and we STILL see poorly sharpened / un-sharpened work.

[AB26]

but I also have a wired remote for my Sony A55,

Manu,

A SLT camera on a tripod with remote release and it is almost impossible to get any motion blur. Your images should be very sharp.

[AB26]

You use that word a lot in your post, "crappy".
PS: whats wrong in using your self timer on your camera?

Dave, read the "crappy" in the right context. I am not saying a cable release is crappy. COMPARED to what is available a cable release is "crappy'. Even a "crappy" cable release is better than no remote release at all, just as mush as my "crappy" Vivitar tripod is much better than no tripod at all.

What is wrong with using the self timer?
1. Battery power. (On a D200 it is a factor to be considered)
2. Motion blur! Not using the delay function for the shutter YOU GET MOTION BLUR.

[AB26]

Finally, of course, when you leave your remote release behind you can effectively use the camera self-timer. The 2-second delay available on some cameras facilitates this...

Not enough time to stabilise the whole lot..........

[AB26]

Andre, you started out with a good thread and as stated some good advice for people to think about. It headed downhill when you reacted poorly to others making valid points. I think your OP reflects a narrow perspective based on your style/subject matter. All of what you said is useful in a certain context or under certain conditions. As with most things in life, context makes a difference.

For example in one of your subsequent comments you seemed incredulous regarding why one would need to use a remote shutter release while shooting in continuous shutter mode. It is actually done quite often by for example bird photographers shooting birds returning to a nest to feed chicks. One sets up the tripod, focuses the camera on the appropriate spot, then stands with remote in hand and shoots a burst at a predetermined spot/settings when the bird comes in to land.

Thank you Dan,

To make the context of my post clear I explicitly mentioned that this post is applicable to shooting under less than perfect light, for those with less than perfect equipment, especially with longer lenses. Reading the post you should understand the context.

Asking a question as to why it would be desirable to shoot a burst under low light conditions, does that seem to be an incredulous comment? Why? Is a question a comment or a statement? I can assure you it is an honest question. Why? Because it does not make sense to me to shoot a burst at 1/15sec whilst trying to get as sharp an image as possible.

Tom makes statements:
“3. Mirror slap is only an issue in a small range of shutter speeds on a tripod.”
Do you agree with that statement Dan?

“4. For many photos, it isn’t the camera that is the source of the blur, but the subject. None of this is relevant for that -- you need to set your shutter sped fast enough to make mirror slap irrelevant anyway in that case.”
Did I mention subject movement? Did I not mention “less than perfect light”? At what shutter speed is mirror slap irrelevant?

“5. Monopods are matters of personal taste.”
Did I mention a monopod? How useful is a long lens on a monopod? Will you recommend a rookie photographer to mount a 500mm lens on a monopod, go out shoot flowers and landscapes, trying to get tack sharp images? I will not! Therefore, my challenge to Tom stands, get a sharp image shot with a 500mm lens on a monopod at, let me make it easy, 1/250sec.

I have no intention of misleading newcomers to our passion. When my sister in law bought a 500mm lens for her Nikon I recommended her to go to ODP and buy a very good tripod (Manfrotto MT057C3, would do) with a gimbal head (like,Wimberley WH200), because she can afford it. What would you have recommended?

Within the context of my post I believe I have given the best advice to those whom cannot afford all the luxuries of the best equipment available. It is meant for those wishing to get sharper images without spending a fortune on equipment.

By the way, did you know, the heavier the lens the more mirror slap will affect motion blur, on a less than perfect tripod!

[Mike Buckley]

it is ironic that Nikon consumer level bodies have built in IR remote useable with a $15 accessory. The biggest problem I have with it is keeping track of the tiny remote.

I solved that problem by drilling a small hole in the corner of the plastic casing. I had already seen the solution displayed somewhere on the Internet, so I knew where to drill the hole without causing damage. I placed a small ring through the hole, such as the ring that you would use to hold one or two keys. I then connected that ring to a ring already built into my tripod using a looped cord.

The IR remote control is always either hanging from the tripod or my neck. Ever since using this solution, I have never (again) lost it.

If anyone needs to see where it's safe to drill the hole, just ask and I'll make a photo.

[NorthernFocus]

...If anyone needs to see where it's safe to drill the hole, just ask and I'll make a photo.

By all means please. Sounds like an excellent solution to correct the design flaw that there's no such feature built in by Nikon.

[proseak]

Many years ago, I was working for a 'tog in Cambridge, and he wondered why my pics on 35mm were often sharper than his on 645. To put this into context, those who used medium format then would shoot full-frame now, and 35mm shooters APSC.

The answer was quite simple - I used slow film, a tripod, and a cable release. I also knew the sweet spot of all my lenses, and always used mirror-lock.

He never did get the point...

[Albert Sim]

I solved that problem by drilling a small hole in the corner of the plastic casing. I had already seen the solution displayed somewhere on the Internet, so I knew where to drill the hole without causing damage. I placed a small ring through the hole, such as the ring that you would use to hold one or two keys. I then connected that ring to a ring already built into my tripod using a looped cord.

The IR remote control is always either hanging from the tripod or my neck. Ever since using this solution, I have never (again) lost it.

If anyone needs to see where it's safe to drill the hole, just ask and I'll make a photo.

Hi Mike, I think this is a better solution.

[Albert Sim]

By all means please. Sounds like an excellent solution to correct the design flaw that there's no such feature built in by Nikon.

And Dan, another image for you...


Cheers.

[xpatUSA]

By the way, did you know, the heavier the lens the more mirror slap will affect motion blur, on a less than perfect tripod!

Hello Andre,

Would you be so kind as to clarify this statement? Do you have a reference?

I ask because it runs counter to mechanical engineering theory. As always, I provide an extreme example: two lens, one made of titanium, the other of thick lead. With the same camera fitted alternately with each one, which assembly would have the greater amplitude of motion caused by the mirror action? (Consider the tripod as a damped spring mounting).

Apparently, shutters can induce blur too!

http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/k7shutter/index.html

.

[Mike Buckley]

Dan,

I'll get back to you with the photo.

Albert,

The reason your solution works for you but not me indicates that you're not so nearly the klutz that I am. That's completely understandable because I take all the awards for being a klutz.

Imagine holding the remote control and dropping it in a river. (I came very close to doing that.) If the remote is always attached to a cord that is hanging either from the tripod or my neck, it doesn't matter where or when I drop it.

Also, after shooting a frame, I may want to change a camera setting. That means changing the remote control to a different hand or putting it in a pocket, either of which is both cumbersome and risky about being dropped. Instead, my solution makes it possible to intentionally drop the remote control knowing that it's going to be dangling safely and securely on the end of my cord.

[Albert Sim]

Instead, my solution makes it possible to intentionally drop the remote control knowing that it's going to be dangling safely and securely on the end of my cord.

OIC.. you got the points too Mike. Sorry ye...

[NorthernFocus]

...Would you be so kind as to clarify this statement? Do you have a reference?

I ask because it runs counter to mechanical engineering theory...

Indeed contrary to the laws of physics. I suspect that Andre's reference source is confusing size of lens with field of view, which is typically associated with longer and therefore heavier lenses though in this context probably applies more to macro work. No doubt the tighter the field of view, the more exaggerated camera shake from any source becomes. On the other hand his source may also have been confusing motion being induced versus the time it takes to settle back down once induced. While it is more difficult to excite motion in the heavier mass, once in motion it does take longer to dissipate the kinetic energy in the larger mass.

At risk of being scolded by presumably well meaning posters I also attempt to point out these erroneous generalizations but it is rarely well received