why grainy look....not necessarily focus (Page 2): So the simple conclusion, your "I phone" is the better camera. Others have pointed out while your pictures have grainy look.

BebuLamar

sumo wrote:

Why do these photos look grainy..the entire shoot of 75 pictures all looked about the same.. My I phone took better pictures

Nikon D600, Nikon flash, and using a Sigma 50-250, 3.5-6.3 lens…set on aperture priority for a while then set to manual at abut half way through …. have used it many times before with much better results

So the simple conclusion, your "I phone" is the better camera. Others have pointed out while your pictures have grainy look.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

sumo wrote:

I consider myself taken to the woodshed and beaten... (show quote)

It is not the shutter speed or the aperture setting that has caused your "grainy" look. Because of the small aperture setting (NOT the shutter speed as it has no effect on exposure with flash) your camera was forced to compensate with a high ISO . . . it is the HIGH ISO THAT CAUSES DIGITAL NOISE aka "grain".

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

sumo wrote:

I consider myself taken to the woodshed and beaten... (show quote)

"I do know slow shutter speed causes blur/out of focus"

Only partly right . . . slow shutter has nothing to do with out of focus. Camera or subject movement caused by slow shutter only LOOKS out of focus.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

BebuLamar wrote:

So the simple conclusion, your "I phone" is the better camera. Others have pointed out while your pictures have grainy look.

Yeah . . . right. Print an 8x10 from both for the real answer!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

sumo wrote:

I consider myself taken to the woodshed and beaten... (show quote)

Slow shutter speeds can cause blur if either you or the subjects move, but a slow speed will not cause out of focus images. High ISO will cause this. You set the camera to F20, used a flash and had sky-high ISO as a result. An aperture of F8 or so should have given you, with flash at the apparent distances I am seeing which are all less than 15 ft, a working ISO of around 400 or so, which would have given you virtually noise free images. Setting a slow shutter speed would allow for more ambient light, and a shutter speed at the maximum sync speed, which I believe may be 1/250, would make most of the ambient light underexposed and irrelevant to your exposure. Your exposure seems correct, but your settings are totally out of whack. Use lower ISO, larger aperture, and adjust your flash to put out enough power to balance output against recycle time.

BebuLamar

Weddingguy wrote:

Yeah . . . right. Print an 8x10 from both for the real answer!

Absolutely as the OP said so. I don't use either the iphone or the D600 so I take the OP words for it.

CO

Everybody has already mentioned the sky high ISO of 25,600 as one of the problems and the small apertures used. LensTip.com does extensive lens testing. Here is an image resolution chart from their testing of the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS USM lens. You used apertures of f/18 for photo #1 and f/20 for photo #2. That's way past the sweet spot range for that lens.

(Download)

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

CO wrote:

Everybody has already mentioned the sky high ISO of 25,600 as one of the problems and the small apertures used. LensTip.com does extensive lens testing. Here is an image resolution chart from their testing of the Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS USM lens. You used apertures of f/18 for photo #1 and f/20 for photo #2. That's way past the sweet spot range for that lens.

The OP here is not asking about resolution . . . he's wondering why so much digital noise. No connection to lens resolution.

CO

Weddingguy wrote:

The OP here is not asking about resolution . . . he's wondering why so much digital noise. No connection to lens resolution.

Wrong. You took the liberty to change what he said. Re-read his post. Two things need to change in his photos - a lower ISO setting and wider aperture settings.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

CO wrote:

Wrong. You took the liberty to change what he said. Re-read his post.

The OP said "Why do these photos look grainy..the entire shoot of 75 pictures all looked about the same.. My I phone took better pictures"

Please show me where he asked about resolution. In digital photography there is no "grain". The "grainy" look is digital noise. Lens resolution has nothing to do with digital noise.

CO

Weddingguy wrote:

The OP said "Why do these photos look grainy..the entire shoot of 75 pictures all looked about the same.. My I phone took better pictures"

Please show me where he asked about resolution. In digital photography there is no "grain". The "grainy" look is digital noise. Lens resolution has nothing to do with digital noise.

Definitely, the ISO needs to be lowered. In addition to that, a wider aperture needs to be used. You've never heard about diffraction? I've taken images myself at very small aperture settings and seen how the image takes on an overall misty, soft look as compared to images of the same scene taken at larger apertures.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

CO wrote:

Definitely, the ISO needs to be lowered. In addition to that, a wider aperture needs to be used. You've never heard about diffraction? I've taken images myself at very small aperture settings and seen how the image takes on an overall misty, soft look as compared to images of the same scene taken at larger apertures.

You are quite correct . . . but has nothing to do with the problem being asked about in this thread. Here the problem has been correctly identified by a number of members as digital noise, aka "grain". . . caused by using a too high ISO setting. The high ISO setting may have been a setting he incorrectly used, or a result of using aperture priority, an automatic setting on the camera, with a very small aperture.

CO

Weddingguy wrote:

You are quite correct . . . but has nothing to do with the problem being asked about in this thread. Here the problem has been correctly identified by a number of members as digital noise, aka "grain". . . caused by using a too high ISO setting. The high ISO setting may have been a setting he incorrectly used, or a result of using aperture priority, an automatic setting on the camera, with a very small aperture.

Would we not be remiss in not pointing out both issues here? What if he lowers the ISO but continues to shoot everything at f/20? He's frustrated that his photos are always soft. I did my own testing once, photographing this circuit board. I took these photos at f/11, f/29, f/36, and put them together as a triptych in Photoshop. Look how it's changing going from top to bottom.

(Download)

Chadp Loc: Virginia Beach

Weddingguy wrote:

When using flash there are only TWO camera settings that affect exposure . . . ISO which is generally not an adjustment used from one image to the next, but is set according to the light situation at the moment. For best quality the ISO should be kept as low as possible for all situations.
The only other camera setting that affects exposure is the aperture. At a setting of F/16 or F/20 few flash units would have enough power beyond 5-7 feet.
Some of you are thinking that I have missed the FEC (Flash Exposure Compensation) setting, but that is really more of a flash unit setting than a camera setting.

For wedding and other event photography, where under time pressures, little time is allowed for multiple setting changes and test shots, we have always used settings that allow as much latitude as possible to handle different subject distances, room conditions, lightness or darkness of subjects (think black tuxedos and white wedding gowns).

Most flash units (speed lights) are automatic today, and while using them in TTL, it is unwise to have the camera set at any automatic setting including Auto, Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority, Program, etc. The camera in any auto setting sets the exposure based on the existing light BEFORE the flash fires. Indoors the result is almost always the too high of an ISO setting, aperture wide open, and/or slow shutter speeds as the camera tries to compensate for too little light for a proper exposure. By putting the camera on Manual, the existing (ambient) light is ignored, and the flash does it's own auto setting to achieve correct exposure up to it's power capability. Having both the camera and flash set to automatic confuses both the camera and flash and forces it to go beyond it's exposure analysis capabilities. The main result is inconsistency at best.

I know there are many ways to "skin a cat", but here is how we have been doing it for over a decade of digital wedding coverage, with results of over 95% success on exposure.

ISO 400 on all indoor flash shots . . . dropped to 100 outdoors with bright sun and 200 on cloudy days.
Shutter speed of 1/200 second to prevent camera/subject movement recorded from ambient light
Aperture F/4.5 for one or two subjects . . . moved to F/6.3 for groups and close in of three or more people for greater DOF

Because the flash TTL has latitude limitations, if, with those setting, shots are taken so close that the shot is over exposed . . . or so far away that shots become under exposed (when checked with histogram), we make temporary adjustments using the FEC. I should also add that we have always used Lite-Scoops on our speed lights that seem to disperse the light reducing the sudden drop-off of light. This seems to reduce the critical flash to subject exposure experienced with straight-on flash.

Sorry I couldn't give you an easy one sentence answer to your question. Hope that helps.

When using flash there are only TWO camera setting... (show quote)

👍👍. I always shoot manual with a flash. But why do you always use ISO 400 indoors?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Linda From Maine wrote:

#3 shows ISO of 25,600.

Flash and 25,600 ISO don't go together.