Low light and night shots
Aug 11, 2011 12:29:25 #
I am getting better, but still having trouble taking low light shots. This is one that I took last week. I used a tripod and shutter speed of 1/2, aperture of 5.6 and iso of 400. I have a Nikon D3000 with the kit lens.I would like to see a much sharper picture than what I am getting. What can I do to make this picture better?
Aug 11, 2011 16:42:32 #
friedeye
Loc: Los Angeles
Hm. It looks like this was shot about a half hour after sunset - maybe more - because of the UV in the sky, and the exposure on your subject's back. Your light source appears to be a street lamp, by the way it's hitting the trees and the front of your subject. The color temp of the light is warm, making it look oddly like sunset light - so, I have to tell you, as a viewer, I'm a little confused. Feels like Day for Night. It's the street light that's weird - and it diminishes the candle light coming from the bags.
I don't think the issue is sharpness - there will always be problems at 400 and above (although becoming less each year). And your blacks look pretty black to me. Try pulling the exposure down and playing with the color temp.
I don't think the issue is sharpness - there will always be problems at 400 and above (although becoming less each year). And your blacks look pretty black to me. Try pulling the exposure down and playing with the color temp.
Aug 11, 2011 17:46:16 #
I'm sorry, I HAD to say this...buy a Canon! I might add however I wish I had a nikon d90?? to play with.
Aug 11, 2011 17:47:45 #
ahhh, I did notice something..did you notice the guy to your left's t-shirt? It's blurry. Perhaps your camera wasn't quite still??
Aug 11, 2011 19:19:53 #
friedeye
Loc: Los Angeles
... tends to happen if someone moves and your shutter speed is half a second. :wink:
Aug 11, 2011 20:52:13 #
Aug 11, 2011 21:49:26 #
one more consideration would be a remote shutter release which would reduce the possibility of camera shake even more.
Aug 11, 2011 22:09:57 #
It was shot right after sunset. And the spot lights they had set up didn't help.
I will keep working at it.
Thanks for the comment
I will keep working at it.
Thanks for the comment
friedeye wrote:
Hm. It looks like this was shot about a half hour ... (show quote)
Aug 12, 2011 11:26:13 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
I have owned the Nikon D40X, 3000 and 5000 - I could never get the true sharp photo that I was looking for. I've purchased a Canon EOS 40D - Seems to be doing much better.
Aug 12, 2011 11:37:16 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
I have owned and tried the Nikon D40X, 3000 and 5000 - Never could get that sharp photo. The latest camera I've purchased is the Canon EOS 40D. It seems to be doing much better.
Aug 12, 2011 20:23:21 #
friedeye
Loc: Los Angeles
Think the idea of a remote shutter release is excellent. And, if your subject remains still, go to an ISO of 200, stop down to gain depth of field, and expose for a second or longer.
If you still aren't happy, it's your glass or your sensor and you should think about another camera.
If you still aren't happy, it's your glass or your sensor and you should think about another camera.
Aug 12, 2011 22:14:19 #
friedeye wrote:
Think the idea of a remote shutter release is excellent. And, if your subject remains still, go to an ISO of 200, stop down to gain depth of field, and expose for a second or longer.
If you still aren't happy, it's your glass or your sensor and you should think about another camera.
If you still aren't happy, it's your glass or your sensor and you should think about another camera.
Thank you for your suggestions. I will give it a try. I sure hope it is me and not the camera.
Aug 12, 2011 22:29:35 #
jdtx
Loc: SA, Tx.
I think the camera is fine..but a kit lens a lot of time is a pretty big hangup..you need a really big aperture for this kinda shot , and although I don't like to do it, bump the ISO up to 400 or more..although you will get some noise..keep workin' at it..1/2 is really slow..a slight breeze or someone even breathing will cause things to blur at that shutter speed
Aug 12, 2011 22:46:26 #
friedeye
Loc: Los Angeles
I really disagree. 400 plus with her camera is going to be noisy. What she's asking for is a sharper image - not a motion freezing shot. This shot is a woman standing in front of a memorial. Motionless. For the best possible image... do 200 ISO or less.. and stop down. Yeah, I know - crazy. The guy on the left is going to look like a ghost because he's moving. So what? Stop down all the way to F16 if you have to . Long exposure. Still subject. Big depth of field.
It's what you would do with a landscape in low light.
It's what you would do with a landscape in low light.
Aug 12, 2011 22:50:56 #
friedeye
Loc: Los Angeles
By the way - big aperture, opened up, is REALLY narrow depth of field. Would the bags with candles in them even be in focus at, say 1.8, 400 ISO, with a shutter speed of (I'm guessing) 100? I don't think so. Her composition includes the trees. This is a tight aperture and long exposure.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.