# 1/16,000th sec? What for?



## W.Smith (Oct 27, 2006)

Leafing through one of my cam's manuals I found that, in manual mode, it can be set to a 1/16,000th sec shutter speed!

Since one would probably need to illuminate a scene with 3 fullsize suns at 10 feet distance in order to get a visible image with 1/16,000th sec shutter speed, I wonder what the use of such a setting could be.

1/1,000th sec will 'stop' a helicopter's rotors; 1/2,000th sec will 'stop' a humming bird's wings...
Do we really need faster shutter speeds than that? What for?


----------



## Big Mike (Oct 27, 2006)

Because It looks good on the spec sheet?


----------



## Johno (Oct 27, 2006)

Bright sunlight, F 1.4?? No ND filters?


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 27, 2006)

Johno said:
			
		

> Bright sunlight, F 1.4?? No ND filters?



I'll bet you get a beautiful deep grey image!


----------



## Johno (Oct 27, 2006)

W.Smith said:
			
		

> I'll bet you get a beautiful deep grey image!


LOL :lmao:


----------



## rosselliot (Oct 27, 2006)

even though it is REALLY FAST, and the chances are that even shooting into direct sunlight with this shutter speed will most likely give you a slightly dark image. but when shooting sunsets and sunrises, most AUTO digital cameras set themselves to about 1/2000 and that's usually as high as they go. but if you were to set it yourself, you might want to take it up to 1/4000 to allow less blurring of the colors through the "long" shutter speed. also, you could take one at 4000 and one at 16000 and use layers in PS to make some interesting images...

it's PRETTY much useless...but not completely. 

- RE


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 27, 2006)

"blurring of the colors through the "long" shutter speed"

Huh? 1/2000 is a 'long' shutter speed?
I know about color _shift_ at shutter speeds over 1 minute long. Getting worse as the shutter speed gets longer.
But "blurring of the colors"... what IS that? Do blues and yellows turn green?


----------



## fmw (Oct 27, 2006)

"Shutter" speeds like this are actually fairly common in flash photography.  I have no idea what kind of flash duration my studio strobes produce when they are dialed down all the way but I know I don't have to use a tripod.

Perhaps 1/16,000 is what you need to photograph a bullet in flight.  I don't know.  I've never photographed a bullet in flight.  I'll go with Mike.  It looks good on the spec sheet.


----------



## Flash Harry (Oct 27, 2006)

In 1996 my old dynax 9000 had SS to 1/12000 of a second, using fast film shooting sports in bright light with wide aperture it produced the goods, I would think for digital cams to have this spec it would be attractive to sports togs too.


----------



## Remi M. (Oct 27, 2006)

I had to use 1/8000 shutter speed for this shot:






So I don't think 1/16000s (just one full stop faster than that shot) is crazy.


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 27, 2006)

fmw said:
			
		

> "Shutter" speeds like this are actually fairly common in flash photography.  I have no idea what kind of flash duration my studio strobes produce when they are dialed down all the way but I know I don't have to use a tripod.


I seem to remember the duration of a Metz CT60's flash varies between 1/5,000th and 1/30,000th of a sec. So that's what I'm assuming my 5600D's do too. It bears out in practice because I can always shoot unsupported with the 5600D's on their own tripods. Synced at 1/200th sec. And any minor movement is stopped dead in it's tracks. Tacksharp.


> Perhaps 1/16,000 is what you need to photograph a bullet in flight.  I don't know.  I've never photographed a bullet in flight.  I'll go with Mike.  It looks good on the spec sheet.


Imagine the amount of light you would need when you want to use 1/16,000th to actually capture that bullet.... staggering! Can't be done without flash. Synced flash.

Although 35 years ago I _did_ capture a 107mm mortar grenade as it left it's launch tube. It is visible as a streak. Shot with a mechanical 35mm Olympus Trip camera at 1/200th sec!
A lucky shot.


----------



## LaFoto (Oct 28, 2006)

W.Smith said:
			
		

> Although 35 years ago I _did_ capture a 107mm mortar grenade as it left it's launch tube....A lucky shot.


 
(You having been 11 at the time I would think it was a lucky shot 
But a very cool one, all the same, eh?)


----------



## LWW (Oct 28, 2006)

At 1/8K second with my Nikon F4s and a Nikkor 80-200MM f2.8 and Kodak ISO 200 I could stop a baseball pitch in flight with enough clarity to see the individual stitches and read the brand name and signature section when enlarged.

I also used it extemsively shooting USAF jets. My D50 only goes to 1/4K. At 1/16K shooting jets would help.

Ever see a pic of a plane as it breaks the sound barrier?

LWW


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 28, 2006)

LaFoto said:
			
		

> (You having been 11 at the time [...]


I wish.


----------



## Flash Harry (Oct 30, 2006)

I've done a bit hi-speed stuff in the studio, actual shutter speed makes no difference,camera on bulb, studio was in darkness using metz ct60's triggered by infra red light beam as the target broke the beam, flash fires capturing the subject.


----------



## LittleMan (Oct 30, 2006)

What camera is it??


----------



## W.Smith (Oct 30, 2006)

LWW said:
			
		

> Ever see a pic of a plane as it breaks the sound barrier?



Yes, it's one of my rotating desktop pix:


----------



## jwkwd (Oct 30, 2006)

How cool is that !


----------



## Chris SWF (Nov 8, 2006)

Hi, 1/16,000 is not necessarily a shutter speed that you might use but it may be a shutter speed you need to attain a certain exposure at a given aperture. For instance it is not unusual to have a shutter speed of 1/60th at F22 at ISO100 on a bright day but if for a shot you wanted to use your lens at its max say f1.4 then the shutter speed for the same exposure would be 1/16000. Even more difficult on some Nikons which have a low ISO of 200. Hope this helps, Chris.


----------



## W.Smith (Nov 8, 2006)

Chris SWF said:
			
		

> Hi, 1/16,000 is not necessarily a shutter speed that you might use but it may be a shutter speed you need to attain a certain exposure at a given aperture. For instance it is not unusual to have a shutter speed of 1/60th at F22 at ISO100 on a bright day but if for a shot you wanted to use your lens at its max say f1.4 then the shutter speed for the same exposure would be 1/16000. Even more difficult on some Nikons which have a low ISO of 200. Hope this helps, Chris.


_That_ makes sense. Thanks, Chris.


----------



## toastydeath (Nov 8, 2006)

Even 1/16000 isn't fast enough for _some_ stop action photography.

1/10,000,000th exposure.
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=456
http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_photographs.htm


----------



## DocFrankenstein (Nov 8, 2006)

That's a cool sport. Where do I sign up? :lmao:



			
				toastydeath said:
			
		

> Even 1/16000 isn't fast enough for _some_ stop action photography.
> 
> 1/10,000,000th exposure.
> http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=456
> http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_photographs.htm



16 100
11 200
8 400
5.6 800
4 1600
2.8 3200
2 6400
1.4 13000
1.2 16000

Maybe if you like shooting with 85 f/1.2 L wide open outside... or 50/1.2

If you do, you're a nut.


----------



## W.Smith (Nov 8, 2006)

toastydeath said:
			
		

> Even 1/16000 isn't fast enough for _some_ stop action photography.
> 
> 1/10,000,000th exposure.
> http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=456
> http://simplethinking.com/home/rapatronic_photographs.htm



Nope. Not 1/10,000,000th (of a sec) exposure.
The rapatronic camera has "an exposure time of as little as ten nanoseconds". That is 10 x 1,000,000th of a sec = 1/100,000th of a sec.


----------



## toastydeath (Nov 8, 2006)

W.Smith said:
			
		

> Nope. Not 1/10,000,000th (of a sec) exposure.
> The rapatronic camera has "an exposure time of as little as ten nanoseconds". That is 10 x 1,000,000th of a sec = 1/100,000th of a sec.



My apologies - I misread it and was reading how long after the blast the photo was taken.


----------



## W.Smith (Nov 8, 2006)

toastydeath said:
			
		

> My apologies - I misread it and was reading how long after the blast the photo was taken.


No apologies are in order here.
It's pretty quick in _any_ math!


----------

