Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Low Light Photography Question
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
Jun 17, 2017 08:52:36   #
cthahn
 
If you are happy with what you got, that is all that counts. Understand light. Anything you do will be a compromise. A faster lens.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 09:04:54   #
BushDog Loc: San Antonio, TX
 
AFPhoto wrote:
I have that same equipment mix and shoot high school basketball games. The lighting is terrible and the action is fast. I push the ISO up as high as needed to get about 1/500 on the shutter and f2.8 then I use Lightroom noise reduction to reduce reduce noise. Typically I am at ISOs greater than 10000. LR noise reduction is very effective.


I agree. I have that equipment and software too.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 09:47:30   #
markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ
 
How about posting a couple of photos so we can see results with your setup. BTW:I have the same equipment.
Mark
Nature_Shooter wrote:
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the lighting was extremely low. I tried something that worked however I am looking for advice for next time.

Here is the set up:

Lens: 70-200 (most shots were 170-200)
F2.8
ISO 6400
File Type: Raw
Canon 5D mIII
Using a tripod

Did not want to push the ISO any further but the shutter speed at this setting was too slow to freeze movement. It was not fast movement (she is only 3) but movement nonetheless. What I did was underexpose by 2/3 to 1&1/3 stops so the shutter speed was about 1/200 of a second. I recovered the brightness in post (Lightroom). The pictures will never be blown up to a large print but will end up in photo books that I purchase on line.

Is purposely stopping down like this when the light is low to obtain the shutter speed you need in hopes of recovering in post an acceptable method or should I increase the ISO and accept the further loss in quality? Or, is there another technique I am missing?

Thank you.
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the light... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2017 09:48:02   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
AFPhoto wrote:
Bball is as tough as it gets. Generally there are brighter spots on the court as the lighting is uneven. I try to sit on the floor and concentrate on action in those bright spots. Best perspective when the camera is at players level and you would be surprised at how much illumination the bright spots provide. By the way I am 74 years old and I shoot at 1/500 to compensate for hand shake 1/125 should be fast enough to freeze action. Good luck


In my experience, 1/125 is not fast enough to stop action as fast as a basketball game.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 09:50:23   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
david vt wrote:
AFP. Hi. The reason I was interested in the low light was specifically indoor Bball in lousy school gyms...

Looking a a relatively fast zoom lens @2.8, but I think the ISO 6400 of the D7100 would be limiting in trying to get to 1/500 even with this lens.

Suggesting any tips more than welcome...


...when I was shooting indoor with a D300 if I got 1/320th I was in heaven, and it worked fine if I was judicious *when* I clicked the shutter...there are plenty of moments where movement is suspended (the top of a jump for example) and you can get sharp no-blur pics. That said, better equipment has allowed me not to worry so much about not getting enough shutter, but the lessons learned at slower shutter speeds still come in mighty handy...

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 10:24:46   #
pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY
 
Nature_Shooter wrote:
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the lighting was extremely low. I tried something that worked however I am looking for advice for next time.

Here is the set up:

Lens: 70-200 (most shots were 170-200)
F2.8
ISO 6400
File Type: Raw
Canon 5D mIII
Using a tripod

Did not want to push the ISO any further but the shutter speed at this setting was too slow to freeze movement. It was not fast movement (she is only 3) but movement nonetheless. What I did was underexpose by 2/3 to 1&1/3 stops so the shutter speed was about 1/200 of a second. I recovered the brightness in post (Lightroom). The pictures will never be blown up to a large print but will end up in photo books that I purchase on line.

Is purposely stopping down like this when the light is low to obtain the shutter speed you need in hopes of recovering in post an acceptable method or should I increase the ISO and accept the further loss in quality? Or, is there another technique I am missing?

Thank you.
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the light... (show quote)


if the pictures are not to be blown up, i would go manual, f/2.8 shutter, to stop say 1/250, and auto ISO. Yes you may go higher than 6400 but the 5DIII does a damn good good at high ISO's and you can PP the grain. I found the auto ISO outstanding, especially for changing light. Once you have your Ap and Sh setting, you can then concentrate on composition(following the person) and not staring at dials. Have used this for iceskating and concerts.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 10:30:17   #
markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ
 
I agree. (same equipment). I frequently set to manual, auto ISO and f/2.8, 1/250 - 1/500 in low light. PP adjustments are easy.
Mark
pithydoug wrote:
if the pictures are not to be blown up, i would go manual, f/2.8 shutter, to stop say 1/250, and auto ISO. Yes you may go higher than 6400 but the 5DIII does a damn good good at high ISO's and you can PP the grain. I found the auto ISO outstanding, especially for changing light. Once you have your Ap and Sh setting, you can then concentrate on composition(following the person) and not staring at dials. Have used this for iceskating and concerts.

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2017 10:47:22   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Shooting Indoor sports is tough - it's what caused me to go FF to get the reduced noise at higher ISO. I agree with many of the posts - you should be able to shoot to at least ISO 12,800 (if not higher) and deal with the noise in post. While the 70-200 f2.8 is the classic indoor sports lens (it's what I typically use), you may be able to go to a faster lens if you can get close enough. This year, I'm going to try my 135 f2.0 and see if it will deliver without excessive cropping (which will make the noise more noticeable) and if I can live with the shallow DOF wide open - that one stop will allow half the ISO, and it's a lot lighter - a consideration when you're hand holding for a couple of hours. In terms of shutter speed, I'd shoot (no pun intended) for 1/500 if possible. You may get by with 1/250 for certain shots, but you'll lose some shots due to blur.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 11:30:04   #
Dan De Lion Loc: Montana
 
Nature_Shooter wrote:
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the lighting was extremely low. I tried something that worked however I am looking for advice for next time.

Here is the set up:

Lens: 70-200 (most shots were 170-200)
F2.8
ISO 6400
File Type: Raw
Canon 5D mIII
Using a tripod

Did not want to push the ISO any further but the shutter speed at this setting was too slow to freeze movement. It was not fast movement (she is only 3) but movement nonetheless. What I did was underexpose by 2/3 to 1&1/3 stops so the shutter speed was about 1/200 of a second. I recovered the brightness in post (Lightroom). The pictures will never be blown up to a large print but will end up in photo books that I purchase on line.

Is purposely stopping down like this when the light is low to obtain the shutter speed you need in hopes of recovering in post an acceptable method or should I increase the ISO and accept the further loss in quality? Or, is there another technique I am missing?

Thank you.
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the light... (show quote)


-----

This situation is a photographic opportunity. Go for a solid exposure and get creative. As CHASGROH said, go for the decisive moment where the action slows or stops. Additionally, let the movement and blur work for you instead of trying to eliminate it.

An analogous situation is pics of running water. One approach is to freeze all movement. - Each water droplet frozen in time. Another approach is to blur the water movement with a slow shutter speed and let the sensuous, creamy water flow.

Quite a while back I photographed a bicycle race for a national magazine. The cover picture had a blurred background (from depth-of-field and panning), blurred feet and wheels, and an in focus rider.

For instance, imagine a dancer with an in focus, stationary face and a turning body. The body somewhat blurred with outstretched arms more blurred. There you've got the grand daughter element and the dance movement element in one pic.

-----

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 11:30:30   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
Use high ISO (I use Auto ISO and let it go where it goes) and accept a less-than-sharp photo that needs plenty of post processing.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 11:42:39   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Kevin, at 200mm you don't have but one other choice in lenses and it's pretty expensive!!
You were creating extra noise by underexposing.
You would be better off shooting at 200th and letting the ISO float on Auto ISO.
The only more viable solution is to use a shorter, faster lens and getting permission to get closer.
BUT the more wide open, the shallower the DoF gets. That's the trade off.
That kind of shooting is always gonna be tough.
Your choice is to stay at 6400 and get movement which comes out being a useless shot. Better to have gone up in ISO and deal with the noise the best you can, at least you get the shot!!!
I have shot 1000's of dance shots and ALWAYS use Auto ISO.
Auto ISO is not something to avoid but to use when it's appropriate. Movement is NEVER appropriate, so go with the lesser of the evils, noise vs blur!!
Use a 50 1.4 and get closer!!! Good luck
SS
Kevin, at 200mm you don't have but one other choic... (show quote)


Good advice. I shot a daughter's indoor, not well lit college graduation with a 100-400 and let the ISO float on a 7D. Yes there was a bit of noise but fixed in post and they came out great with excellent detail from a 3/4 basket ball court and halfway up the stadium seating away. MAC Center in UNLV so you know how big that place is. I also used program mode. Again worked well.

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2017 15:41:54   #
glenn mayher
 
#1 mistake was using a 5d. There are better cameras made for this situation.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 17:46:18   #
MtnMan Loc: ID
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Kevin, at 200mm you don't have but one other choice in lenses and it's pretty expensive!!
You were creating extra noise by underexposing.
You would be better off shooting at 200th and letting the ISO float on Auto ISO.
The only more viable solution is to use a shorter, faster lens and getting permission to get closer.
BUT the more wide open, the shallower the DoF gets. That's the trade off.
That kind of shooting is always gonna be tough.
Your choice is to stay at 6400 and get movement which comes out being a useless shot. Better to have gone up in ISO and deal with the noise the best you can, at least you get the shot!!!
I have shot 1000's of dance shots and ALWAYS use Auto ISO.
Auto ISO is not something to avoid but to use when it's appropriate. Movement is NEVER appropriate, so go with the lesser of the evils, noise vs blur!!
Use a 50 1.4 and get closer!!! Good luck
SS
Kevin, at 200mm you don't have but one other choic... (show quote)


Movement blur can be very nice for dancers.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 17:48:41   #
MtnMan Loc: ID
 
Nature_Shooter wrote:
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the lighting was extremely low. I tried something that worked however I am looking for advice for next time.

Here is the set up:

Lens: 70-200 (most shots were 170-200)
F2.8
ISO 6400
File Type: Raw
Canon 5D mIII
Using a tripod

Did not want to push the ISO any further but the shutter speed at this setting was too slow to freeze movement. It was not fast movement (she is only 3) but movement nonetheless. What I did was underexpose by 2/3 to 1&1/3 stops so the shutter speed was about 1/200 of a second. I recovered the brightness in post (Lightroom). The pictures will never be blown up to a large print but will end up in photo books that I purchase on line.

Is purposely stopping down like this when the light is low to obtain the shutter speed you need in hopes of recovering in post an acceptable method or should I increase the ISO and accept the further loss in quality? Or, is there another technique I am missing?

Thank you.
My granddaughter had a dance recital and the light... (show quote)


You left out a key factor: metering mode. You should use spot or center metering on the dancers. That might help on shutter speed as they are likely lit better than the background.

Reply
Jun 17, 2017 18:15:07   #
bgtank32
 
We all should have software to reduce noise, however I am unaware of any software to remove motion blur.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.