# POLL: Do you need 1/8000s shutter speed?



## Marsu42 (Jan 6, 2015)

Some say a body with "just" 1/4ks is unusable and not a real man's camera. That made me set up this poll because I wonder how the general CR crowd feels about this.

My personal experience is that the missing 1/8ks hurts most for bracketing w/o a nd filter. Otherwise the stopping power isn't as significantly different unless shooting rockets in flight and it cannot be "fast enough". When in doubt I'd rather opt for one stop lower iso, esp. on crop.

What's your take? Exercise your right to vote now or forever hold your peace!


----------



## lintoni (Jan 6, 2015)

I think I've used it. Once. Possibly...


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jan 6, 2015)

Probably the most common time I have missed having 1/8000th is when shooting with the fast primes out in daylight. Moving from the 5D3 to the 6D, I have definitely missed it. Yes, there are filter work arounds, but I would much rather just have something that doesn't require an extra step in order for me to work around.

Also, since the middle of December when Fuji released the firmware update for the x-t1, I have been using the electronic shutter which goes all the way up to 1/32000th and can say wholeheartedly that I love being able to shoot that fast. I have been using the 56/1.2 wide open all throughout the middle of the day and have taken a lot of shots that are between 1/13000th and 1/32000th during said time period.


----------



## surapon (Jan 6, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Some say a body with "just" 1/4ks is unusable and not a real man's camera. That made me set up this poll because I wonder how the general CR crowd feels about this.
> 
> My personal experience is that the missing 1/8ks hurts most for bracketing w/o a nd filter. Otherwise the stopping power isn't as significantly different unless shooting rockets in flight and it cannot be "fast enough". When in doubt I'd rather opt for one stop lower iso, esp. on crop.
> 
> What's your take? Exercise your right to vote now or forever hold your peace!



Yes, Sir, Dear Friend Marsu42.
Yes, I need SS = 1/8,000 Sec. one time in every 12 months to keep my Canon 1DS running, Before Her Die. to shoot the drop of water.
Plus I use 1/8,000 Sec. SS. to shoot my EF 85 MM , F/ 1.2 L MK II at F= 1.2 in the bright sun shine with out use ND 8 Filter for get the total Blur of background for Super Portrait Photo, Such as My Son Practice Taekwando, by Jumping in to the AIR and KICK 15 times per Second. Yes, Just One Photo, before he grown up.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Surapon


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jan 6, 2015)

I use it occasionally, depending on how bright it is and whether I want to shoot wide open. In general use, I rarely shoot with shutter times shorter than 1/3200.


----------



## pwp (Jan 6, 2015)

Do I use 1/8000? Yes, probably a few dozen times a year in varied situations. It's just one of those tools you have in the bag that you may not use that often, but nice to have for those odd occasions. It doesn't weigh anything and doesn't take up any space. What's not to like?

Most often I'll use 1/8000 when using HSS in bright sunlight and needing a wide aperture. It's very rarely used to stop action in my work, though others will value it for this. 

I regard the existence of 1/8000 as giving the freedom to use wide apertures in bright sunlight.

-pw


----------



## bertrandG (Jan 6, 2015)

1/8000s is quite useful to me in order to shoot with fast primes on sunny days. I would even be happy to get a faster shutter speed sometimes.

According to a quick lightroom EXIF search it corresponds to 2.5% of my shoots. That's more than once every 12 months on my side.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 6, 2015)

pwp said:


> What's not to like?



The price of premium cameras being able to sustain this shutter speed over their life cycle!

Question is if Canon disabled 1/8k on the 6d for marketing reasons or to get away with cheaper build quality. On the Rebels, afaik it's because they've got a completely different (i.e. cheaper) mirror/shutter construction.


----------



## Besisika (Jan 6, 2015)

Need it mainly when shooting wide open at 1.2 outside, maybe 100 times a year. 
Sometimes, it is not even enough and have to use the non-standard ISO 50.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 6, 2015)

Its super rare looking at my LR catalog to shoot @ 1/8k but the shots I do have are @ from F/1.2-F/2 or Have HSS speedlites involved.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jan 6, 2015)

I've used it for daytime football when I wanted a really small DOF (f/2.8) with a 400mm lens. I think I used mostly 1/5000s that day, but that was the reason.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 6, 2015)

Sports in bright light with a 2.8 lens, actually looking through the catalog any bright light narrow dof situation, I have hundreds of 1/8000, actually I have many at 1/10,000, 1/12,800 and 1/16,000 because the 1D APS-H sensor went to 1/16,000, but it did bottom out iso at 200.

The last time I shot the tennis at Wimbledon, in 2005, I think the vast majority were at 1/8,000 and above. But I have travel shots, birding, surfing, yacht racing, dog trials and airshows, as well as HSS strobist playing all at and above 1/8,000.


----------



## Akhiel (Jan 6, 2015)

More than 95% I stay below the 1/2000s. But sometime it's nice to have it for a bit fun. I tried to 'freeze' the rotating blade of a jet engine at cruise speed, but I think the 1/8000s (7D) was not enough here .


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 6, 2015)

Another vote for fast lenses.


----------



## NancyP (Jan 6, 2015)

stopping power - bird-in-flight photography with supertelephoto lens
That said, I need the 1/8000 for my APS-C birding camera, not for the FF landscape camera (which still has 1/4000 top speed).


----------



## Maiaibing (Jan 6, 2015)

Unrelated rant: I'd like ISO 25 and 1/500 flash sync even better. But I'll take what I can get.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Jan 6, 2015)

Stopping power? A camera and a gun can both "shoot" people, but I've only ever heard the term "stopping power" in reference to the latter. More specifically in reference to ammunition and various calibers.

I assume you meant freezing action?


----------



## bmwzimmer (Jan 7, 2015)

It's better to have it than have it than the extra step of removing the UV filter and screwing on the nd. However, in some cases, 1/8000 is still not fast enough and a ND would still be needed.


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 7, 2015)

I need it for stopping power in bright light even without a very wide aperture. What I mean I shot a hockey game outdoors in bright sunlight, and part of the arena was in the shade. I wanted to keep my shutters above 1000 to stop movement, my aperture as low as possible to fade out some annoying backgrounds and my ISO at 100 to keep my dynamic range up to deal with the glaring snow and black uniforms. Between 1/1000 and 1/8000 only gives 3 stops of difference and I found myself having to continually adjust my aperture to compensate for the variety of exposures needed. I found myself wishing for 1/16000 second exposure that day. I'm sure a better photographer could have found a better solution but that's just my 2 cents


----------



## Jules (Jan 7, 2015)

Hi,
I like it for some BIF, when these are unpredictable and/or super fast with their wings (like hummingbird hawk-moth !) and also for fast "primes" ... not L primes yet (just updated some glass to go with 7DII but not all yet), but even the 50 1.8 II can be tricky in nice sunny summer afternoon for portraits (i specially like portraits in front of cascades / water-fountains with pearly sparkling bokeh ...). Probably per year about 100-200 uses on average 5k shots.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 7, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Only time I've used 1/8000 was to shoot the transit of Venus across the face of the sun. When does that happen again next?



10 December 2117. Same day they update the 1DX. 

1/8000 is cool. i use it when I can. But does everyone understand they whole exposure takes much longer? In an exposure like 1/8000 of a second really most exposures that are faster than your flash sync speed, the shutter is a slit that travels across the film plane. At 1/8000, the slit is pretty small.


----------



## distant.star (Jan 7, 2015)

.
I use it to impress women. They really get it!!


----------



## Act444 (Jan 7, 2015)

No, but it is nice to have just in case.

I can only recall one time when I would have used it but my camera at the time topped out at 1/4000s.


----------



## ninjapeps (Jan 7, 2015)

I use it, though very, very rarely since I don't shoot outdoors in daylight all that much and almost never at faster than f4.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 7, 2015)

_I've never used it, or 1/4000 either. The fast shutter speeds are way down on my list of desirable features._


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 7, 2015)

For 2013 and 2014, I've used 1/8000 0.7% of the time. Combined 1/4000 + 1/5000 + 1/8000 is about 3% of the time. I almost always shoot using Av, so I'm setting up for freezing action for subjects in the shade, and then shoot something under direct sun, the shutter speed will get up there. Most popular ISO that it happens at is 400, although it still happens quite a bit at ISO 100, especially with fast lenses.


----------



## rpt (Jan 7, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Only time I've used 1/8000 was to shoot the transit of Venus across the face of the sun. When does that happen again next?


+1
That time I had the 300D and so did not have the 1/8000 setting


----------



## candc (Jan 7, 2015)

I wish the 6d had it.if you want to shoot the 50l wide open (that's the reason you buy it) in bright daylight you have to use a nd filter.


----------



## kennephoto (Jan 7, 2015)

IglooEater said:


> I need it for stopping power in bright light even without a very wide aperture. What I mean I shot a hockey game outdoors in bright sunlight, and part of the arena was in the shade. I wanted to keep my shutters above 1000 to stop movement, my aperture as low as possible to fade out some annoying backgrounds and my ISO at 100 to keep my dynamic range up to deal with the glaring snow and black uniforms. Between 1/1000 and 1/8000 only gives 3 stops of difference and I found myself having to continually adjust my aperture to compensate for the variety of exposures needed. I found myself wishing for 1/16000 second exposure that day. I'm sure a better photographer could have found a better solution but that's just my 2 cents



Buy an old canon 1d classic, I have one and it can shoot at 1/16,000 of a second. Not my photo but an example of 1/16,000!

http://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_030721-N-0000S-023_The_destroyer_USS_Thorn_(DD_988)_fires_her_aft_MK_45_5-inch-54_caliber_lightweight_gun_mount_during_Sink_Exercise_(SINKEX)_2003_off_the_coast_of_Virginia.jpg


----------



## eli452 (Jan 7, 2015)

Do not recall using 1/8000 but the mechanism that can take that has better build quality (I hope).


----------



## Marsu42 (Jan 7, 2015)

candc said:


> I wish the 6d had it.if you want to shoot the 50l wide open (that's the reason you buy it) in bright daylight you have to use a nd filter.



But then again, just having one stop faster shutter wouldn't save you and you'd have to use a nd filter anyway?


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 7, 2015)

I didn't do any research through my pic data, but...

I use speeds up to 1/2000 very often and up to 1/4000 sometimes. 
I cannot recall if and how often I've used speeds higher than 1/4000. 
But it's nice to have that as a reserve, e.g. bright light, fast action (insects, etc.).

So I voted for that.


----------



## streestandtheatres (Jan 7, 2015)

I went for a walk recently and ended up with about a dozen photos at 1/8000. It was on the top of a mountain, very clear air and very very very bright light. The landscape shot was under cloud, and still at 1/8000. (35mm at 1.4 on a 7dii)


----------



## canon1dxman (Jan 7, 2015)

I use it quite a lot in sports shooting. One notable time was trying to get Tiger Woods full golf swing (in his prime!) Used at cricket too.


----------



## pwp (Jan 7, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> Unrelated rant: I'd like ISO 25 and 1/500 flash sync even better.


For sure...I'd take the 1/500 sync speed any day.



distant.star said:


> .
> I use it to impress women. They really get it!!


Hah! ;D

-pw


----------



## DominoDude (Jan 7, 2015)

I need it to shoot mating bunnies; only way to get rid of the motion blur. ;D
I've also heard that it's useful if you want to capture the disappearance act of a paycheck, but I have had no recent way of confirming that...

Jokes aside: I have it, and I use it. Examples would be like - Shooting water spray from crashing waves against cliffs in the summer with the sun slightly behind them, or landscapes dominated by snow and ice on a clear and bright winter day.
It has also come into play when bracketing, and when shooting sports on the beach.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 7, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > I wish the 6d had it.if you want to shoot the 50l wide open (that's the reason you buy it) in bright daylight you have to use a nd filter.
> ...



Many times it is just enough. I did a similar thing at the beach, and I had to put on the CP and drop the ISO to 50 to get it into min shutter time of the camera. Sometimes the highlights are still blown slightly, but it's better than blowing out the midtones.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jan 7, 2015)

TexPhoto said:


> ouch! ;D


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 7, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



Agree. I have a low $ ND filter and a high $ polarizing filter. Often the polarizers 2 stops + 1/8000 of a second are enough to avoid the ND filter.


----------



## IglooEater (Jan 7, 2015)

kennephoto said:


> Buy an old canon 1d classic, I have one and it can shoot at 1/16,000 of a second. Not my photo but an example of 1/16,000!
> 
> http://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_030721-N-0000S-023_The_destroyer_USS_Thorn_(DD_988)_fires_her_aft_MK_45_5-inch-54_caliber_lightweight_gun_mount_during_Sink_Exercise_(SINKEX)_2003_off_the_coast_of_Virginia.jpg



Thanks! That's cool 4mpix would be enough for my sports use.. just not for landscape.. . Putting some perspective to what I said, I don't do sports much, so the want of 1/8000 probably wouldn't keep me from getting
the 6d anyways, I'd probly just drag an nd filter around. Unless sports/action or fast moving subjects are your bread and butter, you probably won't miss it imho


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 7, 2015)

I've never used it to stop motion, but I have been in many situations where I needed it with fast lenses. At f/2.8, a C-PL usually keeps things at or below 1/8000s, but with the 24, 50, and 85L with their f/1.2 and 1.4 apertures, I have needed 1/8000s and an ND many times when shooting portraits on the beach and in other extremely bright locations, even at f/2. Pale models wearing white against white sand doesn't help, either


----------



## jdramirez (Jan 7, 2015)

The day was sunny, the aperture was f2.8, and the shutter speed was 1/8000. So yeah... and I like shooting wide open, so f1.4 or even f1.2 on a cloudy day... Yeah... I'll happily shoot at 1/8000 rather than using and filter.


----------



## Halfrack (Jan 7, 2015)

Getting CMOS to ISO50 but limiting to 1/4000th is a trade-off lots of folks would take.

Remember, medium format cameras have been limited to:
1/500th - Hasselblad V/500 series, lots of LF copal shutters
1/800th - Hasselblad H series
1/4000th - Pentax, Mamiya (Phase One) Focal plane shutter

You should see how small that slit is and how fast it's moving to do 1/8000th, especially across a FF sensor. APC is so much smaller, going a much shorter distance, allowing for smaller moving parts. The only way to get faster is with a fully electronic shutter.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jan 7, 2015)

All I can say is, I love having 1/8000th and faster. Here are a couple at 1/32000th from a few days ago. Even then, I brought down the highlights between -40 and -50.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jan 7, 2015)

jdramirez said:


> The day was sunny, the aperture was f2.8, and the shutter speed was 1/8000. So yeah... and I like shooting wide open, so f1.4 or even f1.2 on a cloudy day... Yeah... I'll happily shoot at 1/8000 rather than using and filter.



Exactly. The reason we buy all these fancy super fast optics are to be able to use them at large apertures whenever and however we please. Combine that with the fact that I think of filters like condoms in most instances, I would rather shoot without one 100% of the time if I can help it.

The only two instances (for me) where any type of filter is acceptable are either doing video with a large aperture in bright light to bring down the shutter speed, or for daytime shots where you want a long shutter for your shot.


----------



## Diko (Jan 7, 2015)

surapon said:


> Yes, Sir, Dear Friend Marsu42.
> Yes, I need SS = 1/8,000 Sec. one time in every 12 months to keep my Canon 1DS running, Before Her Die. to shoot the drop of water.
> Surapon



Try with two or more flashes... You will see water awesomeness in a new "light" ;-)







The quote is from "*Lucy*"


----------



## bholliman (Jan 7, 2015)

My 6D can only do 1/4000 and there are times I wish I had faster shutter speeds available. ND filters can help darken the image enough to get by with 1/4000, but the darken the viewfinder enough its often difficult to see what you are shooting in bright light with a wide aperture.


----------



## nc0b (Jan 10, 2015)

While there are lots of examples here from others who use 1/8000th, if I see my 6D blinking as I am over exposing in AV mode, I have some other setting out of whack. Usually the ISO was set much higher for some other shoot, and I forgot to set it back to my normal default of 400.


----------



## TexPhoto (Jan 12, 2015)

Just for fun, ratcheted up to 1/8000 today.



REX11383 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr


----------



## TexPhoto (Feb 4, 2015)

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Feb 4, 2015)

The original 1D managed 1/16000 sec according to DP review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1d

If they could do that back then why can't they do it now? Would it be used often? I doubt it but on a "Do it All" camera like the 1DX I think this sort of facility should be available. After all there are some (me?) who fancy the idea of freezing insect wings, or at least getting close!


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 4, 2015)

johnf3f said:


> The original 1D managed 1/16000 sec according to DP review:
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1d
> 
> If they could do that back then why can't they do it now? Would it be used often? I doubt it but on a "Do it All" camera like the 1DX I think this sort of facility should be available. After all there are some (me?) who fancy the idea of freezing insect wings, or at least getting close!



Because the shutter curtains are traveling at the same speed, the 1D curtains had less far to travel than the 1DX curtains.

And the 1/500 sync is due to the fact that the 1D had a CCD sensor so had an electronic second curtain.

If you want to freeze insect wings do it now with equally short, and shorter, flash duration speeds.


----------



## TexPhoto (Feb 6, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > The original 1D managed 1/16000 sec according to DP review:
> ...



As mentioned, it's a 1.3 crop camera. But no 1.3 crop cameras after that could. But can we see some of your 1/8000 second images with motion blurred insect wings? And how much light do you plan to dump on the insect? I shoot with a f2.8 and have to use ISO 400-800 to get 1/8000 sec exposures in full sunlight. Are you sure you won't light you insects on fire?

I've considered getting a 1D just to shoot 1/16000 sports photos, they are $100-300 on eBay. Still I think I'd shoot 2-3 good ones and then stick it in the closet.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Feb 6, 2015)

TexPhoto said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...



Not quite sure that I have properly interpreted your post, however my point was that "it would be nice to have" and that they could do it in the past. Also that, in their flagship models, manufacturers should incorporate everything they can. Maybe you won't need some of the features - I certainly don't, I haven't even looked at the manual to find out how to turn on the video function as life is too short!
Would I like higher available shutter speeds - yes. It is no biggie but it might be handy/interesting occasionally. There are lots of other things I would like as well such as 6 ISO etc..etc.. The shutter speed thing is something that we know they can and have done. 
Incidentally if you look at a slow motion sequence of Canon's shutters working one can see that (at high shutter speeds) the exposure is effectively a slit between the shutter blades that passes over the sensor. Therefore the exposure speed is determined by the speed of the blades and the size of the slit so sensor/film size is not important.
This is not a new idea (see Leica focal plane shutters) or the fixed shutters (slits) that RAF cameras used in the 1940s producing the characteristic strip images that my father's squadron (RAF 225 Sqdn) used to shoot in 1942/3.
There may well be issues, such as durability or Auto Focus, which make such high shutter speeds impractical but if this is not the case then I would like to have it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 6, 2015)

johnf3f said:


> TexPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



John,

To answer your fundamental question, Why are there not faster shutter speeds? Because the slit between the first and second curtain at 1/8000 is tiny, I expect they see reliability and consistency issues going faster, essentially, making that tiny slit smaller.

When you reply, But they did it before with the 1D? The answer is that was different technology and it didn't have so far to travel. CCD's (the 1D) and CMOS (everything after the 1D) are fundamentally different and even at this point they can't make global (electronic) shutters work on CMOS sensors like they can on CCD sensors, so the newer cameras have to rely on mechanical shutter tech, not advanced sensor tech like the 1D did. Also the 1D sensor is 1.3 times shorter than a ff sensor, this means it covers it's sensor in 33% less time.

The advantages of CMOS over CCD for general photography have been very apparent for a long time and so outweigh the advantages CCD have over CMOS that even the quality holdouts, medium format digital, have now all moved to CMOS from the last generation which were all CCD's.


----------

