Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Shutter Speeds
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
Aug 18, 2017 18:50:49   #
boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander
 
jonjacobik wrote:
Amazing picture. So I did a little math and concluded a 500 mph jet traveled 1.09" in 1/8000th second. Then I thought about converting that to pixels. I saw about 3 pixels of blur against the sky which wasn't moving, and 6 pixels of blur against the other jet. Then I decided I the math was beyond me, but someone out there should know how long it would take the jet to travel 3 pixels.


About as many angels that can fit............

Reply
Aug 18, 2017 18:53:23   #
canon Lee
 
JayHT wrote:
I find it impressive that today's cameras can achieve such high shutter speeds, but I wonder how accurate are these speeds. When cameras are represented to achieve speeds of 1/8000th of a second just how close do they get? Is it perhaps "close, but not quite" or are they 100% on spec? Are you aware of lab tests that verify the manufacturer's claims?

Regards,
JayHT


To me the exact number is not as important as picking the correct speed.

Reply
Aug 18, 2017 18:53:47   #
boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander
 
John_F wrote:
Okay, I confess to ibstant instead of instant. On my iPad the "n" button is next to the "n" button. I have a bad habit of not watching my button punching finger. Fibgeribg, er fingering, errors are one of my fortes. Sigh.


I have similliar problens. Ny fimgers oftem hit the wromg kye

Reply
 
 
Aug 18, 2017 19:49:24   #
JayHT Loc: NorthWest Washington
 
I am the OP that posted the question and my inquiry never stated that "I was concerned with inaccuracies in measuring fractions of a second" In fact, I was interested in finding out to what degree the representations of speed were accurate and nothing more. Perhaps some of you were not in a position to answer the question as you were either unable to correctly read my inquiry or you added your own facts to my question. For those of you that took the time to read and correctly understand my inquiry, I thank you for your educated responses.

Regards,
JayHT

Reply
Aug 18, 2017 22:59:01   #
Nikonman44
 
actually you were probably right on.

The total eclipse can effect the size of the sand granuals for two weeks either side of the phenomenal

Reply
Aug 18, 2017 23:02:05   #
Nikonman44
 
thats a very very perplixelin question and way too far over my shutter for me to grasp.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.