Can anyone handhold a 2 second exposure with good results?

[shadow]

I was reading about this new iPhone 14 on petapixel. The mentions his photo was produced with 2 seconds exposure and handheld.

"On the flipside, Night Mode is pretty impressive and does make a notable difference in quality compared to not using it. The iPhone will take longer exposures that are either calculated automatically or it provides you the ability to determine how long you want to make the exposure manually. I don’t have the steadiest hands, but even I was able to get a tack-sharp photo that had a two-second exposure time that was captured in Night Mode, which produced a photo with better color, better fine details, and better overall results."

So in my various years of experience where anything with SLR, older Smartphones, pocket digitals, and my MILC any exposure longer than 1/60 without support of a tripod is usually junk and blurry. The iPhone camera software must be doing all the work, or am I missing some brain cells? I had an iPhone with live mode enabled 7 years ago, and the camera was great, better than the (2) Samsung androids at the time on the same trip. In fact no comparison in IQ. I am still skeptical of a 2 second exposure being accurate without some trick in holding by hand. Appreciate any input you guys with higher end equipment and maybe side by side tests have done with normal DSLR's or MILC's- seems impossible but I have never owned high end Canon models. Thanks.

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Review: The Only Camera You Really Need

It feels like a true upgrade, at least as far as photos are concerned.

petapixel.com

 

[scyrene]

I have 1/60 hit or miss, usually 1/100 is as slow I can go. So on your iphone what is the exposure? Any idea? Do you think it takes a rapid set of exposures like "live view" mode photos? I owned one 5 years ago and that appears to be the case.

My recollection is that recent iPhone cameras have a 1/2sec maximum individual exposure time limit, the older ones went a bit higher I think. During night mode, it's taking lots of sub frames and merging them, using a combination of image stabilisation and algorithms to keep things sharp as well as reducing noise and increasing DR.

I'm a bit surprised you find it hard to keep things still for 1/60, what focal length is that? I just double checked and with the RF 800 I can go to 1/80-1/100, with the RF 35 I'd say 1/5 is reliable, 1/2 so-so, 1 sec occasionally possible. Obviously this is only with static subjects. Other relevant factors are pixel density (movement will show more on an R5 than an R6, for instance), and noise (shooting in very low light where I might want to use long exposures, noise can be so high it masks very fine camera shake).

 

[Aussie shooter]

Depends on what you consider good results. Personally I would say no.

 

[vikingar]

Depends on how you define a 2s exposure (really!). I was recently on a tour of some caves with the iPhone 14 Pro Max and to take a photo I had to keep the camera still for 2-3s, there's even a crosshair to help you keep on target using the accelerometer and it shows "2s" during capture. Every one of the photos I took is "usable", i.e. not a blurry mess. So it's kind of true!

However, looking at the EXIF data the slowest shutter speed I see is 1/8s. My guess is that the final image is actually a smartly stacked and aligned composite of multiple 1/8s exposures, and the software disregards any blurry ones. Probably it's even smarter than that.

The final images are fine to look at on a smartphone screen, but any zooming in and they fall apart. Heavy NR, exaggerated colors and generally soft. But still, great option to have while traveling, I'm happy with my snapshots.

Obviously unsuitable for larger prints or any sort of professional work.

 

[shadow]

Depends on what you consider good results. Personally I would say no.

I wonder if Canon will eventually add in rapid exposures plus alignment software to compete? In my case, not looking at large poster sized prints quality but something that competes with "live view" or whatever they call it on iPhones

 

[shadow]

Depends on how you define a 2s exposure (really!). I was recently on a tour of some caves with the iPhone 14 Pro Max and to take a photo I had to keep the camera still for 2-3s, there's even a crosshair to help you keep on target using the accelerometer and it shows "2s" during capture. Every one of the photos I took is "usable", i.e. not a blurry mess. So it's kind of true!

However, looking at the EXIF data the slowest shutter speed I see is 1/8s. My guess is that the final image is actually a smartly stacked and aligned composite of multiple 1/8s exposures, and the software disregards any blurry ones. Probably it's even smarter than that.

The final images are fine to look at on a smartphone screen, but any zooming in and they fall apart. Heavy NR, exaggerated colors and generally soft. But still, great option to have while traveling, I'm happy with my snapshots.

Obviously unsuitable for larger prints or any sort of professional work.

That's good first hand confirmation versus reading an article from someone getting paid. Interesting, snapshots nothing wrong with that! Especially in the grand scheme of things as preserving memories versus an constant art project is really imo, important. Being in a dark underground environment, likely a guided tour it would be difficult to concentrate anyway in that situation. I didnt know that it used the accelerometer and show grid lines to guide, but makes sense to use several axes of sensoring your movement. The camera manufacturers could perhaps start looking into such competing features. I just watched Peter Coulsons video mentioning zebra lines in still photos are not offered by Canon! huh? Since I don't own expensive R series anything I was surprised, maybe the R6 markii will?. My A6400 at $1k does.

 

[koenkooi]

You can increase it to 5 seconds as well, it works quite well if you can keep it very steady. I mainly use it to take a picture of my kids when they look cute falling asleep.
And the one day a year we get snow, it delivers great results when trying to capture undisturbed snow a few hours before sunup. At 5 in the morning I can’t work up the motivation to setup a tripod

 

[Aussie shooter]

I wonder if Canon will eventually add in rapid exposures plus alignment software to compete? In my case, not looking at large poster sized prints quality but something that competes with "live view" or whatever they call it on iPhones

They might but it wouldn't be a priority. I mean. We already have that in the smart phones we carry in our pockets anyway. And it isn't good enough to print large so why bother competing against a smart phone? canon are likely more focused on high quality outputs as a way to discern 'real' cameras from phone cameras

 

[koenkooi]

They might but it wouldn't be a priority. I mean. We already have that in the smart phones we carry in our pockets anyway. And it isn't good enough to print large so why bother competing against a smart phone? canon are likely more focused on high quality outputs as a way to discern 'real' cameras from phone cameras

I do wish Canon would add such features, having access to more creative tools in-camera isn’t a bad thing.

 

[Aussie shooter]

I do wish Canon would add such features, having access to more creative tools in-camera isn’t a bad thing.

Like i said. They might. But for me it seems that there is a point where the 'tool' takes over from the creativity and skill and it begins to take away from the final product. Even if that is only in the perception of the viewer. And trust me, I know. I get a LOT of people asking if my photos are real or faked with the second option being a deal breaker for a sale. Many people don't care of course but enough do that it is beginning to detract from the art. And every new computational 'feature' that is added to a camera only increases this effect

 

[scyrene]

I regularly use night mode on my iPhone handheld up to 10sec equivalent exposure time (but it's not actually exposing for ten seconds). With the R6 using IBIS+ILIS I find even 1 second at say 35mm very hit and miss, but that's a much bulkier setup and it's a true long exposure. Certainly 1/4-1/2sec can be useable if you do several in quick succession.

 

[old-pr-pix]

Computational photography and IBIS can work wonders. Hand held true 2 second exposure is 'easily' handled by my 2 generations outdated Olympus m43 gear with 'normal' focal length lens. You do have to be reasonably careful - it helps to limit caffeine intake. Newer OMDS models claim even better performance. My three Canon bodies are all dSLR w/o IBIS so 2 seconds would be a no-go with them.

 

[shadow]

I regularly use night mode on my iPhone handheld up to 10sec equivalent exposure time (but it's not actually exposing for ten seconds). With the R6 using IBIS+ILIS I find even 1 second at say 35mm very hit and miss, but that's a much bulkier setup and it's a true long exposure. Certainly 1/4-1/2sec can be useable if you do several in quick succession.

I have 1/60 hit or miss, usually 1/100 is as slow I can go. So on your iphone what is the exposure? Any idea? Do you think it takes a rapid set of exposures like "live view" mode photos? I owned one 5 years ago and that appears to be the case.

 

[shadow]

Computational photography and IBIS can work wonders. Hand held true 2 second exposure is 'easily' handled by my 2 generations outdated Olympus m43 gear with 'normal' focal length lens. You do have to be reasonably careful - it helps to limit caffeine intake. Newer OMDS models claim even better performance. My three Canon bodies are all dSLR w/o IBIS so 2 seconds would be a no-go with them.

So IBIS in body is the key?

 

[shadow]

My recollection is that recent iPhone cameras have a 1/2sec maximum individual exposure time limit, the older ones went a bit higher I think. During night mode, it's taking lots of sub frames and merging them, using a combination of image stabilisation and algorithms to keep things sharp as well as reducing noise and increasing DR.

I'm a bit surprised you find it hard to keep things still for 1/60, what focal length is that? I just double checked and with the RF 800 I can go to 1/80-1/100, with the RF 35 I'd say 1/5 is reliable, 1/2 so-so, 1 sec occasionally possible. Obviously this is only with static subjects. Other relevant factors are pixel density (movement will show more on an R5 than an R6, for instance), and noise (shooting in very low light where I might want to use long exposures, noise can be so high it masks very fine camera shake).

This is with all my cameras, But random events and never turn on flash with pocket cameras, I don't have any neuro problems nor rest the camera properly either, against my head with viewfinder. Usually at a distance looking at LCD. I haven't returned to using viewfinder until recently after 1000's of smartphone snapshots.

 

[Joules]

Like i said. They might. But for me it seems that there is a point where the 'tool' takes over from the creativity and skill and it begins to take away from the final product.

In thid case, there is no creativity involved though and the skill in question is setting up a tripod.

Taking multiple short exposures and combining them to add up the light lowers noise to almost the same degree as using a single exposure of the combined time would. It's a very common technique in astrophotography.

For astrophotography, the camera provides no support, but there is software like Sequator or Deep Sky Stacker that automates the alignment and combining. But those are optimized for astro subjects.

The Smartphone use their own implementation of this approach, adjusted for general purpose imaging. But it isn't faking an image, it's just doing some of the dull work a photographer could do.

To me, that arguing against this kind of feature with concerns that photography is diminished by making it less laborious is unconvincing.

For reasonably static scenes, it would be very convenient to have more assistance with thid procedure.