Professional photographer here for 2 decades chiming in. Is this the same photo people were saying used 1/8000th shutter speed? 1/8000 is extreme overkill for an event like this imo. You would only use this setting to capture fast moving objects, think car races, sports events, etc. Not a subject standing still at a podium. Even people dancing would easily be frozen sharp under 1/1000th in full sun like this. And you don't want to overkill your shutter speed for no reason because you are forced to raise your iso to compensate which makes for more grainy photos. No you want that crisp clear perfect photo, lowest iso possible, professional knows exactly what f-stop, shutter speed and iso combo they need for that perfect crisp photo. Personally I think 1/8000 is just overkill on the shutter for something like this, it's so far above what you would need, I would have prioritized iso and fstop instead, unless I thought I needed to be prepared to capture something at high speed. Now I'm not accusing him of anything, all photographers have their personal style and techniques so maybe he's just a high speed in broad daylight no matter the situation kind of guy who likes high iso and a nearly closed fstop.
Yes it's noise, but old timers like me still say "grain" sometimes, especially when communicating with clients because they understand what grain is but not noise. If he happened to get the bullet streak in focus at f1.6 then this photo is astronomical. At this point it depends on focal distance now, because at 1.6 it's not uncommon for a nose tip to be blurry when an eye is sharp. Maybe he was zoomed in at 200mm? I assumed he was 50-80mm, shot up close from below.
Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.
Professional photographer here for 2 decades chiming in. Is this the same photo people were saying used 1/8000th shutter speed? 1/8000 is extreme overkill for an event like this imo. You would only use this setting to capture fast moving objects, think car races, sports events, etc. Not a subject standing still at a podium. Even people dancing would easily be frozen sharp under 1/1000th in full sun like this. And you don't want to overkill your shutter speed for no reason because you are forced to raise your iso to compensate which makes for more grainy photos. No you want that crisp clear perfect photo, lowest iso possible, professional knows exactly what f-stop, shutter speed and iso combo they need for that perfect crisp photo. Personally I think 1/8000 is just overkill on the shutter for something like this, it's so far above what you would need, I would have prioritized iso and fstop instead, unless I thought I needed to be prepared to capture something at high speed. Now I'm not accusing him of anything, all photographers have their personal style and techniques so maybe he's just a high speed in broad daylight no matter the situation kind of guy who likes high iso and a nearly closed fstop.
It's not grain, it's noise. Flagship camera's today have remarkably low noise.
https://petapixel.com/2022/01/18/the-nikon-z9-is-so-fast-it-can-capture-a-speeding-bullet/
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/can-doug-mills-photo-of-a-bullet-and-president-trump-be-real-yes-heres-how
"The Metadata reports f/1.6 at 1/8,000sec"
F1.6 is letting in a LOT of light, hence 1/8000's. Iso could have been 50-100. Noise would have been a non-issue.
Yes it's noise, but old timers like me still say "grain" sometimes, especially when communicating with clients because they understand what grain is but not noise. If he happened to get the bullet streak in focus at f1.6 then this photo is astronomical. At this point it depends on focal distance now, because at 1.6 it's not uncommon for a nose tip to be blurry when an eye is sharp. Maybe he was zoomed in at 200mm? I assumed he was 50-80mm, shot up close from below.
Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.