jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

I usually start from the idea that it's probably just me. But there have been two different conversations going on UHH and I'm not sure I understand exactly how they play out and if they are what I'm looking at here. Some of my low light pictures seem to be a little grainy and/or seem to have a some undesirable texture in them. I'm posting two pictures I took in Morocco last week--both within a short distance and time but they seem to have come out different in quality. Both were shot with a Nikon d7100, Tamron 16-300 lens at ISO 1000, focal length 16mm, f/8.0 and shutter speed 1/2000 sec. I've made the best adjustments I can make in Lightroom although I don't rule out that I'm forgetting something. But this same pattern has also happened with my Nikon 50mm/1.4 lens in very low light. I know that different cameras respond differently at hight ISOs and I know that the big zoom lenses tend to have trouble at the extremes.

Note that I've never posted a picture here before so I'm not sure if I did it the best way but, using an iMac and Lightroom (the subscription version) I had to export the NEF picture to Pictures where it became a jpeg. I hope they come through OK and that someone can give me some insight as to what is going on. I know some of the bigger cameras give better results in low light but I was hoping the d7100 would be better than this. I also had to keep the shutter speed hight as I was walking on really uneven and slippery pathways and wanted to keep the image as sharp as possible.

(Download)

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Just curious, why 1/2000?

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

I agree that it's just a little fast for the lighting situation but I was on really uneven cobblestones that were somewhat slick and sloped and I have a hard time holding the camera steady under good conditions so I was trying to eliminate fuzzy images. If that's my problem I'll have to rethink how I steady the camera.

jcboy3

Did you need to increase exposure on the first? One possibility is that the first is significantly underexposed; hence there will be more noise when you raise levels.

Post originals without LR processing. That may provide a clue.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Thanks--that's an interesting suggestion. I will go back and look at them because a number of my original shots are significantly underexposed.

tinplater Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

Unless you have a physical disability contributing to unsteadiness (tremor, stroke) you should easily be able to hold your camera steady with a 16mm lens at shutter speeds well below 1/1000. If I am going to make a significant crop or large print, I try to keep ISO below 400 if possible.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Thanks--that's the second reply suggesting shutter speed. I'll need to work on that and see what I can do. Like I said--I generally assume it's operator error although I like to rule out camera issues.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Shutter speed and thus ISO way too high. No high speed/movement in these shots and a very wide lens setting. You could have used a much lower shutter speed. That lens is max 300 mm so for your camera 1/450 or 1/500* with stabilization should have been enough for anything in the zoom range and that would have allowed ISO 250. At 16 mm you could have opened the f-stop at least one stop and gotten the ISO down to 125. So the ISO = noise or at least the possibility dependent on the light and in one the light may have been better than in the other so less noise. White Balance also off, I know there are a lot of blue painted things but everything has a blue tint.

I only use 1/2000 for humming birds etc. You have the settings I would use for BIF and other high speed subjects. Look here http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-493377-1.html for the results of shooting a stationary subject in shade with settings for birds in sunlight. I did this one just last week while trying to ambush birds coming to or leaving the feeders when the butterfly came to a potted Lantana Plant 3-4 feet from me.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

No camera issue here. Operator error only. ISO of 1000 on that camera is pretty rough. Shutter speed could be much much slower. Don't shoot while walking - stop for five seconds.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Thanks--I am learning more all the time. This lesson has just not come home to me until this trip with so much low light shooting. I tend toward higher shutter speeds simply because I am not physically steady--but I'm not all that bad either. I will start thinking about lower shutter speeds with my DOF and lower ISOs and suspect my pictures will improve.

Like I said, I start with the assumption that the problem is probably with me.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Thanks--like I said, I start with the assumption it's me not the camera but I like to rule out possible mechanical issues. It's pretty clear from everyone's answer that I'm too stuck on high shutter speeds--probably because I usually like to freeze action and because I'm not rock-steady--but I'm not that shaky either. Much to think about as I head out again.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

No problem, I am 72 and way out of shape so not real steady. (note to self - get off lazy rear and use home gym machine on patio) but with my 100-400 I find that 1/640 or a bit more with IS turned on (I use position 3 on that 100-400) does very well. On a lens with a tripod collar like my 100-400 or 180 macro I also use a screw on pistol grip when hand holding. That helps a lot. At the wider end you get much more DOF for a given f-stop. I have a 14 mm prime that has so much depth of field I have trouble with manual focus, so I set it for the distance using the little scale in the window on the lens and it works just fine.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If you do have a chance to post the first image straight from the camera, we can probably give some processing tips for a better end-result. But, as noted by others, using a better set of exposure parameters should have produced better input to the subsequent post processing.

tinplater Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

One thing you can do is to really work on your technique of holding the camera...solid base with your feet wide spread, anchor elbows to your chest, squeeze or roll the shutter depression. There are probably excellent guides to help you with a google search and youtube search.

fuminous Loc: Luling, LA... for now...

Did you note that the underexposed scene is back lit while in the other, the light is coming from behind you?