JZA B1 wrote:
Assuming the subject/scene isn't changing quickly and you could go with either faster or slower shutter (adjusting aperture and ISO to compensate and maintain exposure), do you usually go for faster shutter speed or slower?
Any pros and cons on doing it one way vs the other?
It really depends brightness of the subject (sunny, cloudy, dawn, dusk,indoor, nightlife), lens used, desired or needed DoF, and whether you have IBIS or lens stabilization. If the subject or scene is not moving, your movement or camera shake is the other factor. If the camera is on a stable tripod, then there really is no lower limit, except long exposures introduce more noise (may need to turn on long exposure NR).
Constraints -
ISO - lower is better, lowest possible ISO for shutter/f/EV combo.
f - vary depending on DoF needed and lighting, but wide open and small apertures f/16+ usually result in slightly lower IQ. Most lenses perform best in the "midrange" f/ 5.6-11
Shutter - handheld, generally 1/focal length or faster, but can go lower 2-6 stops depending on lens/IBIS stabilization setting. So if you're shooting with a 100mm lens, you want 1/100 or faster, with a 300mm lens 1/300 or faster, but if you have 3 stops of IS, you can go as low as 1/15 or 1/30 in the examples above. But again, on a stable tripod there really is no lower limit on a static subject.
Sometimes creative effects such as a blurred waterfall require a much slower, multi-second shutter speed, on a tripod. If you don't have a tripod, take several shots at higher shutter, and stack them to blur - you need about a dozen or more shots to blend, for example. Or, if you're shooting a helicopter for example, you don't want static rotor blades and prefer to show some blade motion, so only certain slower speeds will work for you (such as 1/60), subject to other constraints above.