Beanbag for long exposures?

[SwissJon]

Just been looking at some of my photos, and realised that on there is movement blur in a number of them where I held the shutter open for extended periods.

Now I know that's often inescapeable, and the tripod i have does a pretty good job most of the time, but I was wondering if a beanbag supporting the camera body and lens might help, especially on the longer shots.

Anyone got any ideas? If so, what make? There's plenty of cheapies on fleabay, but experience now tells me that cheap does not equal good. Mrs SwissJon has offered to make one for me but we can't decide on a filling.. Polystyrene from broken cups or dried beans?

[dvtldav]

I don't think polystyrene will be heavy enough to hold it steady. Dried beans or rice will work but sand will do an excellent job. When I was into shooting rifles I had a couple of sandbags that I made myself. The downside to sand is they are heavier than beans but the upside is they absorb shock better and conform to what they are placed on or what is placed on them better. If you use sand, I would recommend putting the sand in a zip lock bag then sewing it inside a cloth bag, if not the sand will leak out around the stitching of the cloth. Also, do not pack the back tight with either beans or sand as you want some room for the bag to conform to the camera or lens. This is another good reason to use a zip lock bag is you can experiment with the amount of fill to see what seems right.
If you have any other questions just ask.
Dave

[OsmosisStudios]

I wouldnt bother with a beanbag for what your suggesting.

[SwissJon]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

I wouldnt bother with a beanbag for what your suggesting.

Why? Are they no better than a tripod? My biggest problem seems to be when I take photos of more than 10 sec when I use my long lens which is quite heavy.. Any movement gets multiplied. I would have thought that it SHOULD be more stable than the tripod simply because the lens is supported as well as the camera body.

[OsmosisStudios]

You need a proper tripod that can support the weight. Beanbags are for when youre resting the camera on a surface where a tripod isnt really an option (namely safaris). In those cases you're still using a reasonable shutter speed, but when you've got a 400mm or 500mm lens... well you get the idea.

For long exposures you need a down-and-dirty tripod, but a GOOD one.

[Shokinen]

And turn off VR, otherwise it fights against the fact there is no movement.

[SwissJon]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

You need a proper tripod that can support the weight. Beanbags are for when youre resting the camera on a surface where a tripod isnt really an option (namely safaris). In those cases you're still using a reasonable shutter speed, but when you've got a 400mm or 500mm lens... well you get the idea.

For long exposures you need a down-and-dirty tripod, but a GOOD one.

I thought I did have a good one.. It cost me a bomb, a Manfrotto 190 xProB with a Manfrotto 322RC2 Ball Head.. They're both rated for 5Kg, which is about double the weight of my heaviest lens. I was just wondering why a beanbag wouldn't be more stable if I placed it on a rock.. It's on the ground and not getting knocked about by wind, and any ground vibrations this is a seismic area) wouldn't get amplified at the fulcrum in the head?

Originally Posted by Shokinen

And turn off VR, otherwise it fights against the fact there is no movement.

Ken Rockwell disagrees with you there I'm afraid.. And apparently VRII that I have on my 16-85 is supposed to be even more accurate. But the proof is in the pudding as they say, and I tend to take a couple with and a couple without when I'm on the tripod.. Usually I can't tell the difference, buy more often than not, if there is a difference then one with the VR swithed on is clearer.
Image Stabilization (IS) and Vibration Reduction (VR)

[Shokinen]

Originally Posted by SwissJon

Ken Rockwell disagrees with you there I'm afraid.. And apparently VRII that I have on my 16-85 is supposed to be even more accurate. But the proof is in the pudding as they say, and I tend to take a couple with and a couple without when I'm on the tripod.. Usually I can't tell the difference, buy more often than not, if there is a difference then one with the VR swithed on is clearer.
Image Stabilization (IS) and Vibration Reduction (VR)

Just saying buddy. This is probably the lens I use the most, and I haven't seen any issues either. I forgot to remove it so many times..
Anyway, that's what Nikon is recommending in your manual page 17, 7th bullet. Talk about beeing precise hahaha.
http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/...5_3.5-5.6G.pdf

[Krusty79]

Are you using the mirror lockup feature that navcom recommended? You don't have any camera straps or anything like that flapping around in the wind on those long exposures, do you? I removed my camera strap because of that.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by SwissJon

I thought I did have a good one.. It cost me a bomb, a Manfrotto 190 xProB with a Manfrotto 322RC2 Ball Head.. They're both rated for 5Kg, which is about double the weight of my heaviest lens. I was just wondering why a beanbag wouldn't be more stable if I placed it on a rock.. It's on the ground and not getting knocked about by wind, and any ground vibrations this is a seismic area) wouldn't get amplified at the fulcrum in the head?



Ken Rockwell disagrees with you there I'm afraid.. And apparently VRII that I have on my 16-85 is supposed to be even more accurate. But the proof is in the pudding as they say, and I tend to take a couple with and a couple without when I'm on the tripod.. Usually I can't tell the difference, buy more often than not, if there is a difference then one with the VR swithed on is clearer.
Image Stabilization (IS) and Vibration Reduction (VR)

Point 1: Beanbags just arent stable. They shift their shape, even if you may not notice it, there's settling.

Point 2: Ken Rockwell. Your point is invalid.