Low light question.
Jun 10, 2015 15:42:29 #
If you are on a tripod in low light which gives a better overall picture? A longer shutter speed or a higher ISO?
Jun 10, 2015 15:48:10 #
Jun 10, 2015 15:59:25 #
I'll take the longer shutter speed. For some reason, it's hard for me to raise the ISO- maybe something left over from the film days.
Jun 10, 2015 16:34:41 #
Jun 10, 2015 17:20:40 #
Why ask us? Make the setup in the dark and see what you like best Some of today's cameras do very well at IS) and some of the older ones are worse than terrible. - Davw\e
Jun 10, 2015 19:40:11 #
Ultra-Man wrote:
If you are on a tripod in low light which gives a better overall picture? A longer shutter speed or a higher ISO?
There are actually three types of noise that can be introduced in digital images; Random, caused by short exposures and high ISOs, Fixed Pattern, caused by long exposures at low ISO, and Banding noise, which is camera dependent. There is a good article explaining this here. I would suggest trying different combinations of shutter speed and ISO to see which is the easiest to control and/or fix in post.
Jun 10, 2015 19:53:16 #
DavidPine
Loc: Fredericksburg, TX
I shoot a tremendous number of low light images. I always shoot with a low ISO, 64 to 100, between f/11 and f/22, and a shutter speed up to 30 seconds. I shoot manual, remote release and Mup. About 1/4th of the time I use manual focus (nothing to be afraid of). A really good tripod and good heads are important.
Ultra-Man wrote:
If you are on a tripod in low light which gives a better overall picture? A longer shutter speed or a higher ISO?
Jun 10, 2015 20:06:07 #
Erik_H wrote:
There are actually three types of noise that can be introduced in digital images; Random, caused by short exposures and high ISOs, Fixed Pattern, caused by long exposures at low ISO, and Banding noise, which is camera dependent. There is a good article explaining this here. I would suggest trying different combinations of shutter speed and ISO to see which is the easiest to control and/or fix in post.
Thanks very much for this post Erik!
Jun 10, 2015 20:26:28 #
FrodoBaggins wrote:
Thanks very much for this post Erik!
You're welcome. That article and the links there changed the way I approach noise control.
Jun 10, 2015 20:56:25 #
Erik_H wrote:
You're welcome. That article and the links there changed the way I approach noise control.
👍🏼
Jun 11, 2015 02:30:39 #
Erik_H wrote:
There are actually three types of noise that can be introduced in digital images; Random, caused by short exposures and high ISOs, Fixed Pattern, caused by long exposures at low ISO, and Banding noise, which is camera dependent. There is a good article explaining this here. I would suggest trying different combinations of shutter speed and ISO to see which is the easiest to control and/or fix in post.
Thanks Erik for your post. This article you linked really helped me.
Jun 11, 2015 03:08:42 #
Ultra-Man wrote:
If you are on a tripod in low light which gives a better overall picture? A longer shutter speed or a higher ISO?
A longer SS at base ISO providing the subject is stationary.
Jun 11, 2015 06:52:29 #
DavidPine wrote:
I shoot a tremendous number of low light images. I always shoot with a low ISO, 64 to 100, between f/11 and f/22, and a shutter speed up to 30 seconds. I shoot manual, remote release and Mup. About 1/4th of the time I use manual focus (nothing to be afraid of). A really good tripod and good heads are important.
I'm with you. I never come off ISO 100 in low light. If the light is so low that autofocus barks, I manual focus. I have a cable release but I usually just use the 2 sec built in timer. I can go to ISO 50 but have not yet tried. Some of the dialog on 50 claims it is not better that 100 as it uses some interesting algorithm to get there.
What did you think of 64 vs 100?
Jun 11, 2015 07:08:08 #
Ultra-Man wrote:
If you are on a tripod in low light which gives a better overall picture? A longer shutter speed or a higher ISO?
here are lots of comparisons. Of course, it all depends on the camera. Some do very well with high ISO.
http://www.google.com/search?q=aperture+vs+high+iso&rlz=1C1CHWA_enUS625US625&espv=2&biw=1680&bih=925&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CB0QsARqFQoTCJnj7_e_h8YCFQpsrQodSWcA5w
Also -
http://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/quick-tip-balancing-iso-and-aperture-to-achieve-the-results-you-want--photo-9204
http://digital-photography-school.com/reasons-why-shoot-high-iso/
And here's a handy comparison tool.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&slotsCount=4&slot0Mode=JPEG&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&x=0.30847155341537363&y=-0.7093143108706943
Jun 11, 2015 08:53:53 #
zigipha
Loc: north nj
DavidPine wrote:
I shoot a tremendous number of low light images. I always shoot with a low ISO, 64 to 100, between f/11 and f/22, and a shutter speed up to 30 seconds. I shoot manual, remote release and Mup. About 1/4th of the time I use manual focus (nothing to be afraid of). A really good tripod and good heads are important.
David,
I have found a surprising amount of shake on apparently solid objects whe running long shutters. I mean like sidewalks, hotel floors w/ no one walking in the room. But earth always gives a good shot.
Do you think a better tripod would help in those cases? or maybe some kind of shock absorber (sand bags) would help?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.