The Official "I have a question about photography" Thread

[i_am_hydrogen]

I agree that a tripod is the way to go if you want quality night shots. Nevertheless, you can still take decent hand-held shots provided you have a fast lens.

Here's a thread of hand-held night shots taken with Canon's 50mm f/1.8. Some of them have focusing issues, which is to be expected considering it's a $90 lens, but there are quite a few keepers:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=136277

from that set, by Upward:

[BuffCity]

that 50mm f/1.8 seems like a good deal, I can only imagine how much better the f/1.4 works as far as focus.

nice thing about SLRs is you have the option to make your lens collection reflect what you shoot...might be more expensive paying thousands for glass but try to shoot in low light situations at low ISO at a range of 200mm +...unless you have a good lens you can't do it.

Yea, a Nikon D40, D40x or D60 with a 50mm f/1.8 would be like...600$

not bad at all.

[Raleigh-NC]

Originally Posted by BuffCity

D60 is out!

decent price too as it comes with a VR lens for about $750 US

Nikon has also produced the 55-200mm lens with VR, too. I would assume the price for the kit with both lenses would be about $1000. I know that we are still talking about $700 being the available budget, but I would consider the "BillMeLater" option, which would allow me to send the $700 as a first payment and slowly pay off the rest. Or, got to Wolf/Ritz Camera and try for their credit card, which will allow you to buy this kit free of interest for 6-12 months. I think it would be worth it, for the quality, alone. I have done this for my Fuji S7000, my Nikon D50 and for my Nikon D200.

[Sergei]

I just got the 50mm f/1.8 myself! Seems great so far!

[SpartaRoolz]

Some of the noise can be taken out in post processing. photoshop calls it despeckle. it helps reduce the grain in the photos. You have to ask yourself what am i going to be taking night photos of. If you are taking pics in a bar, point and shoot with your flash. chances are you are drinking and tripods aren't going to do you any good in there. I like the suggestion about using a fence or available objects to rest the camera on.


1/4 second @ f/22 self timer, and resting on a fence.

However when you are using a flash, assuming that the object is close enough to the camera for the flash to actually work (about 15 feet for standard built in flash) The flash is what exposes the image. Set the flash to the "rear" and the end of the photo will be the clear exposed part.

[Srakovski]

I need some help Bought a canon powershot S5IS and im very excited about it since its my first time using such a camera. But ive encountered a few problems and I really hope you can help me

If I do not use auto mode and switch to other modes such as landscape, portrait, will the super steady shot feature be on? Cuz when I tried using the landscape mode, there weren't any "steadyshot" and my pictures turned out blur, how do I solve this problem?

Next question, When im using the auto mode, why is it that before i actually click to snap the picture (pressed halfway to focus), the picture becomes darker than the normal view?

I really hope you can help me answer these questions as it would be of great help to me and I will truly appreciate it Thanks!!

[BuffCity]

Originally Posted by Srakovski

I need some help Bought a canon powershot S5IS and im very excited about it since its my first time using such a camera. But ive encountered a few problems and I really hope you can help me

If I do not use auto mode and switch to other modes such as landscape, portrait, will the super steady shot feature be on? Cuz when I tried using the landscape mode, there weren't any "steadyshot" and my pictures turned out blur, how do I solve this problem?

Next question, When im using the auto mode, why is it that before i actually click to snap the picture (pressed halfway to focus), the picture becomes darker than the normal view?

I really hope you can help me answer these questions as it would be of great help to me and I will truly appreciate it Thanks!!

in many of the point and shoot cameras the IS function has to be set to each of the shooting features (landscape, auto, manual ect ect) when you are shooting in one of these modes look in the menu and see what options are turned on for this feature...Image stabilization should be one of them.

If thats not the case, see if perhaps you are shooting something too dark and might require more stabilization than what IS can provide. More than likely you should be able to just turn the feature on...but I'll let one of the Canon S-Series owners take it from here.

[xzmattzx]

Here is an example of a point-and-click picture at dawn. I took this using the default programmed settings: 800 ISO, lighting or whatever set at 0, no flash, and so on. I touched this up no more than I do any other picture. Does it look too grainy or are there ways to improve it? Would other settings like ISO 1600 be better?

[BuffCity]

I can see the noise where the street and sidewalk meet very easy. ISO 800 on your camera might be a little sensitive but thats at lower light. ISO 1600 would allow you to control the manual settings of the camera more but to double the noise (grain) would be easy to spot.

Can you fix this? I'm sure there are editing programs that can...to some degree but you won't get that crystal clear ISO 50-100 photo you are looking for.

Tripod....ISO 1600 on a DSLR will look better but you wanna carry a 3lb camera around your neck you might as well bring a 2lb tripod as well and do it right.

[xzmattzx]

So is a higher ISO or a lower ISO better in low light or at night when pointing and clicking? How about with a tripod?

[BuffCity]

lower ISO is ALWAYS better.

If you have to raise the ISO when shooting without a tripod, try to minimize it as much as possible...if you are shooting with a tripod you can simply keep ISO at the lowest the camera will go. ISO is light sensitivity, when there is any motion when taking a photo in low light conditions, the ISO elevation will allow the camera to compensate its shutter speed and f/ stop.

[Lawcheehung]

I'm terrible with photography and this question is probably really basic but how do you focus on something in the front while sort of blurring stuff from the back, and vice versa, here's an example from SpartaRoolz's rochester pictures. In this picture it's focused in the front and blurred out in the back.

Is there camera setting that creates this affect.

[Moolio]

Originally Posted by Lawcheehung

I'm terrible with photography and this question is probably really basic but how do you focus on something in the front while sort of blurring stuff from the back, and vice versa, here's an example from SpartaRoolz's rochester pictures. In this picture it's focused in the front and blurred out in the back.

Is there camera setting that creates this affect.

There are three variables that define the depht of field of a photograph:
- size of aperture: bigger aperture translates to shallower field
- focal lenght of lens: longer focal lenght produces shallower field
- distance to focal plane: the nearer the focus to your camera, the shallower the field.

Compact digital cameras have such small sensors - and consequently short focal lenght lenses - that in most situations it is practically impossible to create a nice back- or fore-ground blur, but with a DSLR camera combined with a fast (i.e. large aperture) lens, you'll be able to get that effect.

[BuffCity]

Moolio nailed it...great answer.

[Moolio]

thx, much appreciated.

[xzmattzx]

Originally Posted by BuffCity

lower ISO is ALWAYS better.

If you have to raise the ISO when shooting without a tripod, try to minimize it as much as possible...if you are shooting with a tripod you can simply keep ISO at the lowest the camera will go. ISO is light sensitivity, when there is any motion when taking a photo in low light conditions, the ISO elevation will allow the camera to compensate its shutter speed and f/ stop.

Does low ISO mean that there is a better chance of capturing movement and the accompanying bluriness? Or is that for higher ISO? Is the tradeoff that you can eliminate graininess with one thing, but will have a blurry picture if you don't have a tripod or fi there is too much movement?

[Sergei]

Originally Posted by xzmattzx

Does low ISO mean that there is a better chance of capturing movement and the accompanying bluriness? Or is that for higher ISO? Is the tradeoff that you can eliminate graininess with one thing, but will have a blurry picture if you don't have a tripod or fi there is too much movement?

It all depends on the light conditions.
But yes, typically, higher ISO will be more grainier, but freeze the action better in darker condition. It's a compromise. Depends on what you would rather have.

I would recommend that you use a higher ISO if you have any doubts. But only if it's necessary. Grain can be fixed, but blurriness can't.

I had this dilemma last week when I went to a concert. Of course it was quite dark in the place, but on a lower ISO, everything would be blurred. So I turned up my ISO, and it worked pretty well. I used NeatImage to reduce the grain. Here are some shots I got:

image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr

[Raleigh-NC]

Outstanding photos!!!

[xzmattzx]

These were taken with an 800 ISO and no tripod. I was just walking around at night and pointed and clicked. Are they good enough, or can I lower the ISO a little bit more and still get a clear picture if I hold the camera still enough?

[i_am_hydrogen]

^They're not bad at all. A bit of noise and some softness, but certainly usable. Another part of the equation, in addition to ISO, is shutter speed. Can you control shutter speed on your camera? What about aperture?