Check out AI Artistry and Creation section of our forum.
Shooting in Low light.
May 31, 2014 03:32:47 #
May 31, 2014 06:36:51 #
Assuming a fast lens, f/1.4, f/1.8 f/2.8...generally speaking... cameras with small sensors generally do poorly in low light at high ISO's, Larger sensors as in FX (full frame,larger pixels) camera generally do much better in low light, less noise.
I use Nikon f/2.8 lens to shoot local bands in poorly lit situations, if I use my D7000 (cropped sensor) above 1200 ISO, even at 800 I start to have issues...noise being the big issue...on the other hand if I use a Full Fame like the D700, ISO 6400 is no problem in the same lighting situations.
I use Nikon f/2.8 lens to shoot local bands in poorly lit situations, if I use my D7000 (cropped sensor) above 1200 ISO, even at 800 I start to have issues...noise being the big issue...on the other hand if I use a Full Fame like the D700, ISO 6400 is no problem in the same lighting situations.
May 31, 2014 08:42:18 #
JamesCurran wrote:
I often find myself shooting in low light. (I think my DSLR isn't as sensitive as others, but...)
Other than the obvious adjustments -- ISO all the way up (1600 max on my camera), and aperture all the way down --- what else can I do ?
A few notes: I'm often doing live performances, so I have no control over the lighting and can't use a flash, and need to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible.
Other than the obvious adjustments -- ISO all the way up (1600 max on my camera), and aperture all the way down --- what else can I do ?
A few notes: I'm often doing live performances, so I have no control over the lighting and can't use a flash, and need to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible.
check out www.froknowsphoto.com. Fro is very knowledgeable about shooting in low light.
May 31, 2014 09:30:13 #
If you shoot "often" in low light, consider upgrading to a full frame camera, most of which will allow an ISO of 6400 before noise gets to be a problem.
May 31, 2014 11:11:25 #
SharpShooter wrote:
James, you don't give much info.
But first I use my fastest lens. If you do a lot of that, maybe look for a faster lens.
If the light at those performances changes fairly often, shoot on the best SS on Tv for the circumstance and keep the camera on Auto-ISO.
The camera will shoot wide open and pick the lowest iso it can.
Good luck. ;-)
SS
But first I use my fastest lens. If you do a lot of that, maybe look for a faster lens.
If the light at those performances changes fairly often, shoot on the best SS on Tv for the circumstance and keep the camera on Auto-ISO.
The camera will shoot wide open and pick the lowest iso it can.
Good luck. ;-)
SS
==================
Yep! Yep!! Yep!!!
This is what I do as well when on a Low Light situation...
Even with a Canon 5D Mark II and a Canon 70-200mm 2.8. I set the ISO to AUTO and clean up the noise later in D-Fine (By NIK SOFTWARE).
Yep!!!!
Bars, Churches and Whorehouses have the worst light to capture an image in.
May 31, 2014 11:15:59 #
May 31, 2014 11:31:10 #
PhotoGator wrote:
What lense are you using?
He has said the kit 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 and that is his problem. He needs to get some faster glass as the other 2/3 of the exposure triangle are maxed out.
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
May 31, 2014 11:41:12 #
Considering all the information you gave about your camera & lens, I'd say that you're probably not going to run out and buy a new camera or lens. So, post processing is your best bet.
As a general rule of thumb, underexposed is better than overexposed because all the information is there.
As a general rule of thumb, underexposed is better than overexposed because all the information is there.
May 31, 2014 11:59:48 #
I have done a great deal of live performance shoots. One thing you will find often to be the case is that the subjects face is usually the brightest object in the field of view and it is that object that you want to have properly exposed. If you have your camera set up for zone metering it is very likely you are ending up with faces that are overexposed. About 18 months ago I shot Crosby, Stills and Nash and the lighting was very challenging as each musician usually had a different spotlight on him and sometimes one musician with a colored spot and another with a white light. Using zone metering I was overexposing the faces by 2 to 3 stops which blew out the faces. You only need to look at your histogram to see that. I would urge you to use spot metering and if you set your aperture so your histogram is in the left 1/3 of the scale and you shoot in raw you will be able to recover the darkest areas of the image if you even want to do so. By shooting in the left 1/3 of the histogram scale you will insure that the faces are not overexposed and you will have the fastest shutter speed with whatever lens and body you are using.
One lens I could recommend to you which I own is the
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 which is for APS-C cameras only. It is sharp wide open and has been reviewed by dpreview.com. It is not cheap, about $600. If you don't have any problems carrying more than one lens then go for 2 or even 3 primes. Others have mentioned some good choices for 50mm focal length. If the technique I mentioned above using the histogram to the left and spot metering can get your shutter speed down to 1/100th you might consider buying a very old Pentax 135mm f/2.8 lens on ebay. Lastly I have to say that having a top ISO of 1600 is simply inadequate. I agree with the others that its time to get a new body and shoot at ISO 3200 or 6400. Sensor technology is advancing in leaps and bounds. The newest model professional body from Nikon ($6500) has expandable ISO to over 400,000 and can get high quality images with fairly low noise at ISO of 25,600. As we all know electronics with new or highly advanced technologies usually are introduced at very high prices and then the prices come down dramatically as the demand increases. I think that in a few years we may see camera bodies that sell for under $1000 with that kind of performance as mentioned above in the Nikon. In the longer view, say about 5 to 10 years look out for sensors made of graphene (a polymer of carbon) which will be about 5 f/stops faster than current CMOS sensors. The basic research in that technology is presently underway.
One lens I could recommend to you which I own is the
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 which is for APS-C cameras only. It is sharp wide open and has been reviewed by dpreview.com. It is not cheap, about $600. If you don't have any problems carrying more than one lens then go for 2 or even 3 primes. Others have mentioned some good choices for 50mm focal length. If the technique I mentioned above using the histogram to the left and spot metering can get your shutter speed down to 1/100th you might consider buying a very old Pentax 135mm f/2.8 lens on ebay. Lastly I have to say that having a top ISO of 1600 is simply inadequate. I agree with the others that its time to get a new body and shoot at ISO 3200 or 6400. Sensor technology is advancing in leaps and bounds. The newest model professional body from Nikon ($6500) has expandable ISO to over 400,000 and can get high quality images with fairly low noise at ISO of 25,600. As we all know electronics with new or highly advanced technologies usually are introduced at very high prices and then the prices come down dramatically as the demand increases. I think that in a few years we may see camera bodies that sell for under $1000 with that kind of performance as mentioned above in the Nikon. In the longer view, say about 5 to 10 years look out for sensors made of graphene (a polymer of carbon) which will be about 5 f/stops faster than current CMOS sensors. The basic research in that technology is presently underway.
May 31, 2014 12:54:49 #
May 31, 2014 16:09:51 #
JamesCurran wrote:
I often find myself shooting in low light. (I think my DSLR isn't as sensitive as others, but...)
Other than the obvious adjustments -- ISO all the way up (1600 max on my camera), and aperture all the way down --- what else can I do ?
A few notes: I'm often doing live performances, so I have no control over the lighting and can't use a flash, and need to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible.
Other than the obvious adjustments -- ISO all the way up (1600 max on my camera), and aperture all the way down --- what else can I do ?
A few notes: I'm often doing live performances, so I have no control over the lighting and can't use a flash, and need to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible.
I shot my son's show at a local venue with a d7100 and tamron 17-50 F2.8. Most of the shots were taken between 35 and 50 mm at 2.8 and 100 ISO. No flash and just stage lights. I used spot metering . I had no problem and was very happy with the outcome.
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
May 31, 2014 16:33:31 #
A lot. I've gone from almost full dark to very viewable in Printshop. Of course you pick up grain and color noise the more you lighten an image, but a grainy image is better than none.
RWR wrote:
Since you cannot control the lighting, to obtain higher shutter speeds you need either a faster lens or higher ISO. Perhaps someone will explain how much compensation for underexposure can be done in post-processing.
May 31, 2014 17:02:46 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
Bobspez wrote:
A lot. I've gone from almost full dark to very viewable in Printshop. Of course you pick up grain and color noise the more you lighten an image, but a grainy image is better than none.
Incredible! :)
May 31, 2014 17:22:49 #
PhotoGator
Loc: Florida
I have Printshop 6 but do not use it much.
How do you accomplish so much light change?
I took a photo of my daughter last night at a school dance and she came dark(no flash). She did not allowed me to take another shot.
I would like to be able to fix it.
Thanks.
How do you accomplish so much light change?
I took a photo of my daughter last night at a school dance and she came dark(no flash). She did not allowed me to take another shot.
I would like to be able to fix it.
Thanks.
May 31, 2014 17:37:50 #
PhotoGator wrote:
I have Printshop 6 but do not use it much.
How do you accomplish so much light change?
I took a photo of my daughter last night at a school dance and she came dark(no flash). She did not allowed me to take another shot.
I would like to be able to fix it.
Thanks.
How do you accomplish so much light change?
I took a photo of my daughter last night at a school dance and she came dark(no flash). She did not allowed me to take another shot.
I would like to be able to fix it.
Thanks.
If you can't fix it yourself, upload the picture and check off [X] (store original)
I'm sure one of us can fix it for you.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.