FWIW: Ken Rockwell Tripod Article

[YEKCIM]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-killed-my-tripod.htm

He does make some valid points, and it is a worthwhile read, IMO.

~YEKCIM

 

[DebºoºS]

TU good points there. I was worried future WDW pics with my new D200 would suffer from my tripod laziness. The only reason I haul out a tripod is for deep space binoculars or telescope. Now I can't blame bad pics on not having a tripod

 

[boBQuincy]

I would be very cautious about Ken's advice, he is highly opinionated and as far as I can see, often incorrect.

A camera support is the only device that can make almost any photograph better. Perhaps Ken is a Jedi Master and can handhold a camera perfectly still for 1/4 second, I am not and can see a great difference in many of my photos when I use a support, even at shutter speeds as fast as 1/60.

IS and VR help a lot but consider, once the camera has moved even the distance of one pixel the image has now crossed pixel borders and is blurred. Maybe not much but how much do we spend on cameras and lenses to go and throw away that sharpness so easily?

Cranking up the ISO is nice but also leads to image degradation. Again, why toss away what we paid for? Might as well use cheap filters too.

I highly caution those who are starting out to cast a wary eye at what Ken writes. A lot of it is good but a lot of it is uniquely his and not shared by others who know a lot about photography.
As for me, I will keep my tripod.

 

[DVC Jen]

There is no way I can hold my camera that still - even with my IS lens.

 

[0bli0]

'...digital killed my tripod-star...'

i also don't subscribe to this way of thinking. i use a tripod and monopod in similar situations to film cameras. i can handhold fairly well, depending on the body and lens combo, whether i'm sitting or standing, and what i'm shooting. but i'd love to see Ken take a good fireworks shot, long exposure waterfall, or high magnification wide aperture macro shot without a decent tripod. i'd also like to see him carry a 300 2.8 on a 1 series body for 9 or 10 hours or do consistent team portraits all day.

IS is good, but not perfect. same with noise reduction - it's good but not perfect.

also he suggests comparing f/22 to an f/8 shot - not a true test as many lenses get soft from f/11 or f/16.

i don't always bring my tripod. i bring it when i know there is a situation that i will likely use it. DW and i are going back to China and Tibet in May for a holiday. i probably won't bring my magfibre tripod (but i will definitely bring the gorillapod).

 

[tinksdad]

I'm a tripod believer too!! If the light gets dim and you have to shoot below 30, a tripod will make a BIG difference. Now, if all you shoot is above 100 then maybe you can get by without one. I like night time shots to much NOT to take the tripod!!

 

[boBQuincy]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-killed-my-tripod.htm

He does make some valid points, and it is a worthwhile read, IMO.

~YEKCIM

Ken is always worth reading, he is very interesting and thought provoking. I sometimes wonder if that is really his mission, to get people thinking about photography instead of following the old rules without questioning them.

 

[handicap18]

Ken is like one of those news paper columnists that you hate, but still have to read. Throws ideas out there for the sake of conversation and to stimulate discussion.

While I have taken hand held shots as low as 1/4 that have come out great, I'd much prefer to use a tripod.

I don't see how just because its now digital instead of film that you don't need a tripod for the type of shutter speeds he's talking about. I think that it is irresponsable of him to make these kinds of remarks. I got my 70-300 VR lens not so I can use it in lower light situations, but so that I can eliminate camera shake using it on the long end. Being able to use it in lower light with out a tripod just happens to be an extra benifit to be used only if needed (no tripod available type thing).

 

[mabas9395]

IMO, this is the tripod article that is really worth reading.

http://bythom.com/support.htm

 

[Master Mason]

Might as well use cheap filters too.

OK OK I give, I took the UV filters off my lenses.... I'll try it for a while and see how it goes.

 

[Anewman]

I would be very cautious about Ken's advice, he is highly opinionated and as far as I can see, often incorrect.

It is not as if he has reviewed cameras based solely on specs without ever actually touching them.

Never mind I guess he has.

 

[boBQuincy]

IMO, this is the tripod article that is really worth reading.

http://bythom.com/support.htm

Hmm, never heard of Thom before but I like the way he writes, and what he writes makes a lot of sense to me. I'm not about to go out and spend $1700 nor $1000 on a tripod but I see his point. I have one of his despised Velbons and he is about right in his assessment of it but it is light so I carry it, and any tripod we carry is far better than none at all (as long as it doesn't drop the camera in the dirt).

I also like his ideas (Galen Rowell's ideas) about sunrises and sunsets. I use Ephemeris to calculate where and when the sun/moon will rise and set, it's a great tool for that.
http://bythom.com/calculate.htm

 

[DebºoºS]

..........i'd also like to see him carry a 300 2.8 on a 1 series body for 9 or 10 hours or do consistent team portraits all day.
..........

Dittos
Thank you (really) for bringing back long forgotten awful memories of wrist, arm aches and hand shaking after long hours of holding a Nikon FE w/powerwinder, flash and 50mm 1.2 working for the paper. When I think now (many years older) of walking around WDW in high temps all day shooting with the D200 (which is hefty) and 18-200. Then how could I expect my hands or wrist to be steady enough to take fireworks and castle pics that night. Oh well, guess I have to dust it off and haul it out.

 

[jann1033]

IMO, this is the tripod article that is really worth reading.

http://bythom.com/support.htm

hope his advice is more up to date than his "badly in need of a makeover" 70s photo
i think i saw this article before though and it made sense. while i under stand the first article's point, there obviously are circumstances you need a tripod ...maybe if i followed article 2's advice i wouldn't be so annoyed using them