Are "tripods" really necessary for landscape shots?
Dec 30, 2019 18:13:52 #
toast wrote:
Unless you're trying to do a long exposure to free... (show quote)
Landscape do move so I would need a shutter speed to freeze their motion. But besides that I would like to use only base ISO. So if using base ISO requires a tripod I will use it. Regardless of which camera you have I wouldn't want to use a higher ISO than necessary.
Dec 30, 2019 18:25:48 #
bsprague wrote:
Technology marches on. Cameras now have image stabilization in both the lens and body that can join to reduce tripod need by several stops. Pano software is smart enough that stiching of handheld exposures are just as good as tripod mounted.
I still have a tripod but it is a shadow of my old gear. It is feather light, tiny and fits in my small camera bag.
I still have a tripod but it is a shadow of my old gear. It is feather light, tiny and fits in my small camera bag.
I don't know of any pano software that handles parallax errors well. I can clean those up manually, but it's a lot of work. If you have near objects, a pano head will keep the parallax errors to a minimum (but you have to align such that the rotation axis is near the non-parallax point of the lens.
A very light tripod works well with higher shutter speeds, or with image stabilization activated.
Dec 30, 2019 18:50:55 #
If you position it just so it saves your spot at the crowded national park overlook when shooting the same scene for the ten millionth time.
Dec 30, 2019 19:15:29 #
bleirer wrote:
If you position it just so it saves your spot at the crowded national park overlook when shooting the same scene for the ten millionth time.
Shooting Horsetail Falls, Yosemite.
Dec 30, 2019 20:06:47 #
Longshadow wrote:
I rarely use a tripod for landscapes except in very low light. My Sony A7iii has little noise unless I jack the ISO up to 3200 or more. Also, for panoramas Photoshop will align the different views using handheld. Here's an example: Denali at Dawn, a 3-shot pano, 1/250 sec, f/16, ISO 400, handheld.
Dec 30, 2019 21:06:41 #
jcolton wrote:
I rarely use a tripod for landscapes except in very low light. My Sony A7iii has little noise unless I jack the ISO up to 3200 or more. Also, for panoramas Photoshop will align the different views using handheld. Here's an example: Denali at Dawn, a 3-shot pano, 1/250 sec, f/16, ISO 400, handheld.
That panorama has no close objects, so it's easy to shoot by hand.
Dec 30, 2019 22:14:53 #
toast wrote:
Unless you're trying to do a long exposure to free... (show quote)
So where do you draw the line, do your really need a camera, won't a phone do. What ever makes you happy and satisfies you is certainly good enough for you and that's all that matters. No you don't need a tripod, but I do. I want to use my D850 at ISO 100.
Dec 30, 2019 22:24:18 #
jcolton wrote:
I rarely use a tripod for landscapes except in very low light. My Sony A7iii has little noise unless I jack the ISO up to 3200 or more. Also, for panoramas Photoshop will align the different views using handheld. Here's an example: Denali at Dawn, a 3-shot pano, 1/250 sec, f/16, ISO 400, handheld.
Dec 31, 2019 05:31:46 #
toast wrote:
Unless you're trying to do a long exposure to free... (show quote)
Wait a few years you may change your mind
Dec 31, 2019 05:34:04 #
Wanderer2
Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains
Some landscape situations where a tripod is either helpful or necessary:
Panoramas, as already mentioned
Focus stacking (aka merge)
HDR merges
In camera HDR
In the Pentax world, Pixel Shift Resolution shots
Very low light situations
For me I also use one when shooting a scene that I hope will make a very large print and I want the maximum sharpness possible.
It certainly is true that by using the exposure triangle correctly the need for tripods in landscape photography is much less than back in the film days.
Panoramas, as already mentioned
Focus stacking (aka merge)
HDR merges
In camera HDR
In the Pentax world, Pixel Shift Resolution shots
Very low light situations
For me I also use one when shooting a scene that I hope will make a very large print and I want the maximum sharpness possible.
It certainly is true that by using the exposure triangle correctly the need for tripods in landscape photography is much less than back in the film days.
Dec 31, 2019 06:10:18 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
toast wrote:
Unless you're trying to do a long exposure to free... (show quote)
Yes and No. I like to use tons of filters on my landscape images. So, I find myself shooting very slow because I also use as low as ISO as I can, so, I find that a tripod helps keep my camera steady. I also like to make very large canvas prints, so, I need as good of image as I can, so, usually, my tripod is a standard piece of equipment for landscape images.
If I am taking general landscape shots and I am walking all day, my tripod stays at home during these scouting missions. If I find a location I really like, I will make 100's of image shots and take them home and decide how I am going to approach a final shot. When I do decide, I go back with my tripod.
Dec 31, 2019 06:17:46 #
Longshadow wrote:
Because it's difficult to carry it on a tour bus with 45 other people?
Because there are 100 other people vying for the same shot?
Because I don't feel like lugging it around?
Because there are 100 other people vying for the same shot?
Because I don't feel like lugging it around?
This why I don't do bus tours
This is why I arrive before the other 99 people
I don't mind carrying my tripod at all, but when I was younger I never used a tripod for most work, then I got some sense!!
Dec 31, 2019 06:23:12 #
Haydon wrote:
Another exception would be creating a pano and stitching. Keeping your ISO low gives you better dynamic range and minimizes noise.
I have been in the field and done panos hand-held. You just take more images to ensure you have no missing spots.
These were hand-held panos - at ISOs ranging from 1600 to 3200.
Though I will say that the majority of my panos are done with a tripod.
I don't think that one will see the difference between ISO 100 and 3200 on a large print - unless the viewer is pixel peeping. Human eyesight is not capable of seeing fine detail at distances that correspond with viewing large prints. This is why you can look at an Apple billboard that claims the image was taken with an iPhone and it will look just fine. Get up close, and the structure of the image falls apart, with image elements the size of golf balls.
Dec 31, 2019 06:40:07 #
Wanderer2 wrote:
Some landscape situations where a tripod is either... (show quote)
You can throw in using CPL and ND filters.
Dec 31, 2019 06:54:24 #
johngault007 wrote:
Lol, no not odd, just more disciplined than me for sure. Call it lack of experience, but I tend to move a little faster when I'm not purposely setting up a tripod and finding the best framing for a landscape scene.
Me too
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.