Night time action shots with Canon 70D
Jun 3, 2015 18:44:26 #
sirlensalot wrote:
After shooting low-light night sports, mostly insi... (show quote)
Thank you Sirensalot. It certainly is looking like she is trying to exceed the limits of the equipment, however when she bought the 70D, the salesperson made a point of saying it was a very good low light camera. From the comments here, that does not seem the case.
Appreciate your comments though. :)
Jun 3, 2015 18:52:56 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
Christine105 wrote:
Thank you Sirensalot. It certainly is looking like she is trying to exceed the limits of the equipment, however when she bought the 70D, the salesperson made a point of saying it was a very good low light camera. From the comments here, that does not seem the case.
Appreciate your comments though. :)
Appreciate your comments though. :)
The salesperson was a salesperson trying to sell a camera.
Probably uses her iphone or a point and shoot.
Reading off a spec sheet without really knowing what she was looking at ..... "very good low light camera" can mean many things. ..... It can mean "heaps better than a phone camera".
It can mean "hey it goes to 30 seconds and can make moonlight look like daylight"
Jun 3, 2015 18:56:50 #
amfoto1 wrote:
br br Shoot RAW and avoid underexposure like th... (show quote)
Hi Alan
Thank you so much for your detailed explanation of the capabilities of the camera. I was particularly interested to hear you say "Hell yes, if you look at the image a 100% you'll see noise." I was not aware of that, so have gained some learning from this.
"Scene" presets that dictates not only how exposure is done, but also the autofocus setup and even what type file is saved (JPEG only). I wasn't aware about this comment either. I always thought that if you had the camera in RAW, the output would be RAW. Understand the image on the back of the camera is a JPEG, however she had downloaded to her computer which she and I believed was RAW. From what you are saying that is not the case when shooting in "sports" preset.
Thank you so much, your comments are greatly appreciated and I've learnt something, so hopefully others reading this also, will have.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Jun 3, 2015 18:58:25 #
Alan Myers
You have been most helpful and it is greatly appreciated. Thank you. :) :) :thumbup: :thumbup:
You have been most helpful and it is greatly appreciated. Thank you. :) :) :thumbup: :thumbup:
Jun 3, 2015 19:00:47 #
canon Lee wrote:
Low light is difficult. .
Thank you Canon Lee, i think we can all agree low light is very challenging. I guess that is why we try. :) It appears she is trying to push her equipment beyond it's capabilities, which is not a bad thing, just frustrating. Your comments are appreciated.
Jun 3, 2015 19:04:25 #
lighthouse wrote:
The salesperson was a salesperson trying to sell a camera.
Probably uses her iphone or a point and shoot.
Reading off a spec sheet without really knowing what she was looking at ..... "very good low light camera" can mean many things. ..... It can mean "heaps better than a phone camera".
It can mean "hey it goes to 30 seconds and can make moonlight look like daylight"
Probably uses her iphone or a point and shoot.
Reading off a spec sheet without really knowing what she was looking at ..... "very good low light camera" can mean many things. ..... It can mean "heaps better than a phone camera".
It can mean "hey it goes to 30 seconds and can make moonlight look like daylight"
Lighthouse
You are probably correct that a mobile phone would take better shots, however she doesn't own one of them. She is not a technology person, and even with the computer I have to tell her what to do at times.
Thanks for your comments though. Gives food for thought. :)
Jun 3, 2015 19:08:45 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
Christine105 wrote:
Lighthouse
You are probably correct that a mobile phone would take better shots, however she doesn't own one of them. She is not a technology person, and even with the computer I have to tell her what to do at times.
Thanks for your comments though. Gives food for thought. :)
You are probably correct that a mobile phone would take better shots, however she doesn't own one of them. She is not a technology person, and even with the computer I have to tell her what to do at times.
Thanks for your comments though. Gives food for thought. :)
NO, I didn't say that a mobile phone would take better shots. I just meant that the salesperson probably took her own pics with a phone and didn't use a DSLR ....
But forget my post .... referring to your thanking Alan for his info.
Alan is one of the good guys on here.
There are a surprisingly few people on UHH that if they say something, you can take it to the bank.
Alan is one of those.
He has experience and knowledge .... some of the others that sound pretty good a lot of the time, have experience and opinion. There is a difference :-)
Jun 3, 2015 19:13:47 #
lighthouse wrote:
NO, I didn't say that a mobile phone would take be... (show quote)
Oops Sorry Lighthouse I misunderstood you
:oops: However I tend to agree with you that Alan has experience and knowledge. I really do appreciate the comments from everyone who has tried to help her out. That is the great thing about the Hog. Just sometimes you need to sort the wheat from the chaff :). Cheers :) :)
Jun 3, 2015 22:11:49 #
Try shooting jpeg and forget Raw. It shoots action faster, press photographers shoot Raw for sports. Try shooting wide open f2.8 and Auto ISO and check out noise level, if still too nosey, take off Auto ISO and adjust ISO for effect desired. Good Luck
BV
BV
Jun 3, 2015 22:21:19 #
Christine105 wrote:
Hi All
My mother asked if I would ask you guys how to take Action shots (rodeo and aerial motor bikes) at night in variable lighting conditions. She tried sports mode which took the ISO up to 6400 and everything is so grainy she has had to ditch the lot. (Canon70D)
Would very much appreciate your help as technical stuff is not my strong point. Oh also, she's a lurker :) :) and really enjoys UHH. Have suggested she joins in her own right, but she's a bit shy.
My mother asked if I would ask you guys how to take Action shots (rodeo and aerial motor bikes) at night in variable lighting conditions. She tried sports mode which took the ISO up to 6400 and everything is so grainy she has had to ditch the lot. (Canon70D)
Would very much appreciate your help as technical stuff is not my strong point. Oh also, she's a lurker :) :) and really enjoys UHH. Have suggested she joins in her own right, but she's a bit shy.
Such severe noise sounds strange. I get very good results at 6400 w a bit of added luminance in Lightroom. Granted one might not want to print 11x14. Something else must be going on to make the prints unusable. The only thing I can think of is that she may be under exposing and the pushing the exposure in Lightroom.
Jun 3, 2015 22:25:06 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
bvargas wrote:
Try shooting jpeg and forget Raw. It shoots action faster, press photographers shoot Raw for sports. Try shooting wide open f2.8 and Auto ISO and check out noise level, if still too nosey, take off Auto ISO and adjust ISO for effect desired. Good Luck
BV
BV
She is talking about the noise characteristics of the images.
Would you be able to inform us how shooting jpg will get a higher quality image than the final image able to be achieved by shooting raw?
Press sport photographers are irrelevant to the topic.
They are shooting images spray and pray to be printed on newsprint largely in black and white at quite small relative sizes. This very fact hides a lot of quality errors.
You are not comparing apples to apples.
Jun 3, 2015 22:51:06 #
Jun 3, 2015 23:03:04 #
baygolf wrote:
Could you post some pictures.
They were all deleted.
See the post - Jun 3, 15 01:40:11
Jun 3, 2015 23:42:11 #
With an iso of 12,800 she should be ok shooting at 800 iso but definitely no higher. I know that if I divide my highest iso in half 3 or 4 times I come up with an acceptable iso speed for night, I shoot with a canon 1dmk4 1dmk3 1dsmk3. I bought the mk4 for nighttime sports because after it began getting dark I just had to put the other cameras down. the iso goes to 104,000 but I can't shoot any where near that high and get anything useable.off the top of my head I think I shoot at 1200iso and 1/2,000 at f2.8
Noise shows up in the shadows, so b&w should not hide it well. However, if I turn my noisy shots into high contrast b&w I generally get something I can use, if I run them thru Define2.
I recently bought a canon 50 1.8 lens for low light indoors and can't believe how much more light gets into the camera. Its a cheap lens. ($100.00) But if you can swing the cost of a good 1.8 or faster lens that will definitely help.
Defin2 is a great noise reducer. Google bought it several years ago and I dont know if there is a better one out there. Whatever I run thru it generally comes out looking clean. Well worth the cost.
https://www.google.com/nikcollection/products/dfine/
Noise shows up in the shadows, so b&w should not hide it well. However, if I turn my noisy shots into high contrast b&w I generally get something I can use, if I run them thru Define2.
I recently bought a canon 50 1.8 lens for low light indoors and can't believe how much more light gets into the camera. Its a cheap lens. ($100.00) But if you can swing the cost of a good 1.8 or faster lens that will definitely help.
Defin2 is a great noise reducer. Google bought it several years ago and I dont know if there is a better one out there. Whatever I run thru it generally comes out looking clean. Well worth the cost.
https://www.google.com/nikcollection/products/dfine/
Jun 3, 2015 23:55:54 #
Here is the original and the edited copy after using Defin2
1/200 f4 ISO 2000 canon 1dmk4
hope this helps
1/200 f4 ISO 2000 canon 1dmk4
hope this helps
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.