Paris

by Jon

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the 2-minute tour ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This question already has an answer here:

What shutter speed would you recommend for an indoor karate tournament with slightly dim fluorescent lighting? I will not be using a flash. I'll be using a Canon T3i with an 85mm f/1.8 lens and using shutter priority mode. I normally use raw format but I'm switching my camera to jpeg format to avoid processing lag between pics. What do you think is the slowest shutter speed I can use without motion blur?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Itai, Paul Cezanne, mattdm, Michael Clark, John Cavan Dec 16 '13 at 21:49

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

    
Boxing is different from karate, but from the point of view of answers to this question they're probably similar enough. –  mattdm Dec 16 '13 at 13:21

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

"...without motion blur" is somewhat subjective, as the acceptable amount of blur for me might be different for you. It also depends on how far your subject is from you. Because of these two factors, a specific shutter speed is not what I would recommend looking for. Instead, and since you are shooting digital - simply experiment and see what shutter speed works best for your needs.

Very generally speaking, I would start at 1/125s second shutter speed and work faster from there. You could potentially need as fast as 1/500-1/1000s to freeze very fast motion. I would say a safe bet would be 1/250s, but your results will vary. Depending on the routine, some movements could be very fast and you might want every bit of the subject sharp, if that is the case you will be testing the limits of your equipment with certainty. If the routine is a bit slower or you find a bit of blur in the extremities acceptable, this should be quite achievable with your kit.

What you may find, is that you are forced to shoot at 1/125s because that also requires either a very narrow depth of field, or a very high ISO that is too noisy for your tastes. Again, personal preferences play into this.

Keep in mind also that some motion blur can be an artistic effect that adds to the image. Especially if you can shoot with a flash(but maybe you aren't allowed to), and use second-curtain sync.

Finally, why not browse through some Flickr images and examine the shutter speed used? Nothing beats real world examples to show the differences: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=karate

Here are some examples at varying shutter speeds. These are of a soccer game, but the same idea applies. These are all pretty poor images unfortunately.

18mm, f/3.5, 1/40sec: enter image description here 50mm, f/2.8, 1/125sec: description 18mm, f/3.5, 1/500sec: enter image description here

share|improve this answer
1  
I hadn't thought of checking flickr. That's a great idea. Thank you for the pics you included, those are very helpful! –  PixelGraph Dec 17 '13 at 3:08

Presumably you want to freeze motion, keep your entire subject in focus and minimise noise - in that order. If you want less noise, you'd have to accept some blur (which as dpollitt said, can turn out nicely) - the blur could be due to motion (slower shutter speed) or focus (narrow depth of field/large aperture).

To start, I'd set a shutter speed that will freeze the action, so I'd probably go for about 1/250 as a minimum. From there, I'd set an aperture that will keep my entire subject in focus - if you're not sure what aperture to choose, try using dofmaster.com, or simply experiment on the day. Finally, I'd raise the ISO to whatever was needed to ensure the subject is appropriately exposed.

If the lighting stays more or less the same and the general composition of your photos don't change, you should be able to stick to the same settings most of the time. However, beware that if you're not in full manual mode, changing compositions and having different background colours can force your camera to over- or under-expose your subject.

Two basic rules about depth of field: 1) The closer you are to your subject, the narrower the depth of field, and vice versa, for any given aperture; and 2) the larger the aperture (smaller f-number) the narrower the depth of field, and vice versa (larger f-number), for any fixed distance to your subject. If you decrease the aperture to get more into focus, you may need to increase the ISO to unacceptable levels (heaps of noise), but that depends on your taste.

Having said all that, please experiment with different settings! It's the best way to discover what does what and could provide you with some creative insight for future shoots.

Good luck!


EDIT: In response to Robin's comment, that's correct. To capture a subject about 1.8 meters tall with an 85mm lens on a crop frame sensor, you'd need to stand about 10 meters away, giving you about a meter depth of field at f/1.8 But keep in mind the camera focuses at the surface of your subject, which has depth itself. A person isn't paper thin. f/1.8 at 10m away from your subject, on your lens, would give you only half a meter of acceptable focus into the subject. With extended arms and legs, you'll want to have an even deeper depth of field. An aperture of 2.8 should do the trick, and if you get closer to capture only half-body or head portraits (which often sport photographers do) you'll probably want to decrease the aperture a little further.

This is all very theoretical and probably not necessary - I'd say fiddle around with the settings until you're getting your desired results.

share|improve this answer
1  
Given that he is using an 85mm on a crop sensor, DOF should not be an issue as he will have to maintain a fair distance to capture a half or full body shot. Closer shots showing less of the body might be a an issue though, but for capturing pics of actual sparring matches you don't want to be too close, since it is harder to keep the combatants in frame due to the unpredictable movements. –  Robin Dec 16 '13 at 20:37
    
I took photos at the same venue about six months ago and I used my zoom lens. I had just gotten my first dslr a few days before and didn't know how to use it, so I kept it in full automatic mode. I went over the photos later and they were both noisy and blurry. The action shots were very blurry from too low a shutter speed. Most of the photos were at 100mm and had room to crop. I'm going to use my 85mm this time around and that should get everything in the frame, but if it doesn't I'll switch to my 50mm. Thank you for the great advice. This is really very helpful. –  PixelGraph Dec 17 '13 at 3:21

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.