I was going through some pics that I didn't really like, but couldn't place the reason. In a few cases, it was because the image seemed softer than it should've been. Sometimes this was from simply using the wrong f-stop or bad focus, but in other cases, I zoomed in and noticed what looked like a very slight motion blur.

In the images with this problem, the blur is almost invisible except at max zoom, but the softness was a major problem. Since the camera was on a tripod, I guessed it was caused by that slight motion when hitting the shutter. So the questions of the thread are:

1. Do you use a remote?
2. If so, do you find it's worth it?
3. Are there remotes that can control things like f-stop and shutter speed?
4. If you think they're worth it, can you recommend one? (I'm using a Nikon D3300)

Thanks in advance for any help.

I used to use a remote, but newer cameras have a 2 second timer which is far more useful. Using that I never have problems on a decent tripod. Make sure you enable mirror lock-up for long exposures.

I use a tripod with remote and two second delay. It seems to do the job...

For low light shooting I use a tripod and one of these:

http://www.bhphoto...SA/Nikon_4730.html

Posted by Benched_it I use a tripod with remote and two second delay. It seems to do the job...

Don't know why you'd use a remote AND two sec timer. I'm pretty sure that after 2 seconds your camera has stopped vibrating if you just press the shutter.

Yes to the remote. I don't trust my hands to be steady and the 2sec just on camera can still catch some of my shake. Plus sometimes I don't want to wait 2secs for every shot.

there are apps for smart phones that use your phone as a remote. bonus kicker is that (if your camera is equipped) have bluetooth. also- the one i use you dont have to be in front of the lens as the viewer also picks up the ir signal from my phone.

https://play.googl...id=ir.remote&hl=en

I use the remote for bulb exposures. With a tripod though, the two second timer is usually enough to quell my shaky hands.

I don't see any use for a remote when I can just set the timer to go off 10,20, 30 seconds later. If we're shooting in bulb mode, then a remote becomes a necessity.

Remotes are also useful if you're alone and want to take a photo of yourself. (The remote can help with autofocus.)

Posted by sirpsychosexy Don't know why you'd use a remote AND two sec timer. I'm pretty sure that after 2 seconds your camera has stopped vibrating if you just press the shutter.

So you can compose yourself to not have the remote appear in the photo

Posted by DescentOnARope I was going through some pics that I didn't really like, but couldn't place the reason. In a few cases, it was because the image seemed softer than it should've been. Sometimes this was from simply using the wrong f-stop or bad focus, but in other cases, I zoomed in and noticed what looked like a very slight motion blur. In the images with this problem, the blur is almost invisible except at max zoom, but the softness was a major problem. Since the camera was on a tripod, I guessed it was caused by that slight motion when hitting the shutter. So the questions of the thread are: 1. Do you use a remote? 2. If so, do you find it's worth it? 3. Are there remotes that can control things like f-stop and shutter speed? 4. If you think they're worth it, can you recommend one? (I'm using a Nikon D3300) Thanks in advance for any help.

Post the pictures in questions along with the F number and seconds that show up when you're reviewing them on your camera and the results you were hoping to get.

1.) I don't have a remote yet, but I am getting one very soon.
2.) Definitely worth the added functions for $10 or so.
3.) Not sure.


2 seconds isn't nearly enough time for shaking to completely settle down in my experience. I use 5 or 6 seconds, but many cameras only offer 2 or 10 second, so I go with 10 secs. You took the time to setup your tripod. Don't skimp out on a few seconds on self-timer to waste all this effort.

Pre-focus on something at the same distance you want to focus onto and throw the camera into manual-focus and re-aim. Don't touch the lens and handle the camera gently until you take the shot. It only takes a slight touch on the lens to throw out the focus setting. Some cameras are smart enough to do so automatically, but some will add motion blur if you don't turn off image stabilization on longer exposures.

I had to buy a remote for my last camera for long exposures because I couldn't go above ISO 400. Don't know how I managed with it. I would definitely recommend getting one. They're pretty cheap if you get one with a cable and they do come in handy. They'll definitely help with camera shake, they make bracketed shots a lot easier too.

Posted by DawnPatrol I had to buy a remote for my last camera for long exposures because I couldn't go above ISO 400. Don't know how I managed with it. I would definitely recommend getting one. They're pretty cheap if you get one with a cable and they do come in handy. They'll definitely help with camera shake, they make bracketed shots a lot easier too.

The performance of bundled kit lens is on par with the average P&S camera and worse than premium compact. You usually get F/5.6 on long end. An F/2.8 lens will quadruple the speed. If it requires ISO 1600 at F/5.6, you can shoot at ISO 400 with F/2.8 at the same shutter speed without the quality loss that follows high ISO.

Even though I have a Canon remote, it's range isn't that great.
If I need to be in it and it's further than say 40-50', I prefer the run as fast as you can and try to look composed before the 10seconds are up method.

Running in the dark

ijustgotengaged by No Stone Unturned Photography, on Flickr

Jumping over creeks

Posted by Deuterium 2 seconds isn't nearly enough time for shaking to completely settle down in my experience.

100% disagree. Unless you've built one of these into your camera:


Or you tripod is made out of cardboard.

Upon checking my camera, I noticed something annoying. It does in fact have a 2-second timer - for a remote. For a normal button-press, I have to deal with the 10-second timer.

You can get those really cheap remotes for a few bucks. I have one, but I've pretty much stopped using it. If your phone has IR, you can also install a free app to do the same....one less thing to carry around.

Mirror lockup and 2 second delay is probably the easiest though.

I religiously use mine in any dark situation, but IR is a priority for my next body so I can use my phone. I've already broken one remote.

Posted by DescentOnARope In the images with this problem, the blur is almost invisible except at max zoom, but the softness was a major problem. Since the camera was on a tripod, I guessed it was caused by that slight motion when hitting the shutter. So the questions of the thread are:

2 second timer or a remote is the quick answer.

You never posted any specifics about the images/lens in question, though. IF they're long exposures using a lens with any sort of image stabilization, you'll actually want to turn that off. During long exposures the stabilization will make micro-adjustments to make sure everything's working, which is utterly unhelpful and could be the cause of your blur.

If you don't have stabilization on, then yeah, timer/remote, flavored to taste with a splash of mirror lock-up.

You should never use image stabilization, vibration compensation, or optical stabilization when using a tripod...even with fast shutter speeds. Something about the camera's lack of motion throws the gyros into a frenzy.