help me figure this out...low light shooting

Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?
Thanks in advance one and all!

wrote:
Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?
Thanks in advance one and all!



No Contest!
The Fuji Finepix F30 is the hands-down, low light champion.
See: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_.../fuji_f30.html
Bob Williams

P.S. The guy at the camera shop doesn't know what he is talking about.
A f=1.8 lens lets in a LOT of light.
The images do not print well because they do not contain many pixels

wrote:
Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?
Thanks in advance one and all!

I'm not getting into digicam wars, as I've only owned one digital
camera, a Canon A540. I have owned and used several film cameras, however.

I'll presume that using a flash is out of the question. To help get rid
of the blur without a flash, she should use a tripod, or a monopod. If
that's that doesn't get rid of the blur, then a faster digital camera
(as the salesman probably suggested) or a (shudder) film camera with
high speed film might be in order.

--
Pat O'Connell
[note munged EMail address]
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

Bob Williams wrote:

No Contest!
The Fuji Finepix F30 is the hands-down, low light champion.
See: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_.../fuji_f30.html

f5.0 ? !

(I assume the OP would want to zoom all the way).


--
Ken Tough

Pat O'Connell wrote:
wrote:
Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?
Thanks in advance one and all!

I'm not getting into digicam wars, as I've only owned one digital
camera, a Canon A540. I have owned and used several film cameras, however.

I'll presume that using a flash is out of the question. To help get rid
of the blur without a flash, she should use a tripod, or a monopod. If
that's that doesn't get rid of the blur, then a faster digital camera
(as the salesman probably suggested) or a (shudder) film camera with
high speed film might be in order.

Film camera / high speed film is a big step backwards. Any modern DSLR
blitzes high-iso 35mm film.
Any DSLR is okay for stage photos, even consumer lenses are fast enough,
and stage lighting generally bright enough to get focus lock. You need
to bump ISO up, and learn to nail exposure - as this is more critical
even shooting RAW when using high ISO.

wrote:
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?


Exactly, that 1.8 is the aperture. The lower this number, the more
light enters, so it can work at darker places.

The choice would be a DSLR and a lens with fixed focal length, it means
not a zoom.

I give you a link http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/

This explains canon equipment, that's what I know better, which does
not mean it is the best, but I think you can learn here about what you
want

al-Farrob
www.al-farrob.com

frederick wrote:

: Film camera / high speed film is a big step backwards. Any modern DSLR
: blitzes high-iso 35mm film.
: Any DSLR is okay for stage photos, even consumer lenses are fast enough,
: and stage lighting generally bright enough to get focus lock. You need
: to bump ISO up, and learn to nail exposure - as this is more critical
: even shooting RAW when using high ISO.

Also it is highly recomended that the DSLR have the ability to spot meter.
Since you could then meter off the subject at the center of the frame (or
at the meter spot, sometimes named focus point, for those cameras with
zone focus adjustments) and ignore the frequently dark background. If the
camera is taking the average and the background is black, the main subject
will be very over exposed. Also since the camera will be slowing the
shutter speed to compensate for the dark background you will get much more
motion blur. But with spot metering, you can read the lighting of your
subject and likely get better images. It still takes practice, but having
the right tools for any job increases the odds of a happy outcome.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

wrote:
Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?
Thanks in advance one and all!


Depending of how far away the subject is and how much money you'll willing to
pay you can get a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM EF Lens for about $1100. If your
subject is rather close and you need a few extra fstops, then you might
want/need a Canon 1257B002 EF 50mm f1.2L II USM Medium Telephoto Lens for
about $1600. For less than $300, you can get a Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Standard AutoFocus Lens.

Add about $750 for the cost of a Canon Rebel XTi/400D body and you're all set.

You need high ISO , using your fuji on auto is not be the best setting
but its likely it cant do what you want, the new F30 is probably the
fastest P&S now but you might need something like a Canon Rebel to get
enough speed and a monopod to help you stay steady.

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 19:11:01 -0800, greggsmail wrote:

Hi: Here is my problem. I want to get my wife a new camera for
Christmas. She shoots at shows and plays mostly(lowlight with spots and
movment). She started years ago with the digital camera in our video
camera. Its like 1.2 meg and the lense has written on it"1.8/3.7-37. I
say this because she has taken so many great photos with this but, they
lack detail and of course when you enlarge them they don't look good.
So, anyway, I went out last year and got a Fuji Finepix...I think a
3800....It cannot take a picture in this envionment. Everything is
blurry and oversaturated....it basically just sucks. At least for these
types of shots And so my question....why is this happening? And what
camera....(I was thinking the Nikon SLR type) might be able to pull
this off. The gentleman at the camera store explained that I will never
get those shots without spending thousands...is that true. He said the
lense on the video camera doesn't allow much light in...I guess thats
the 1.8 part on the lense?
Could someone get me headed down the right road?

One can make all kinds of blanket recommendations, but the bottom line is
that unless someone goes with her who knows what they are about and
gives us some numbers to work with it's all speculation. You may be fine
with a good point and shoot, or you may be hard-pressed to get a usable
image with a hundred thousand dollars worth of pro equipment, depending on
the light levels and the degree of movement.

If you can extract the exposure information from some of the photos she
took with the Fuji it might be possible to give you more guidance--to do
this, from Windows, right click one of the image files, then
properties/summary/advanced and with any luck you'll see "F-Number",
"Exposure Time", and "ISO Speed". You can try that on some that turned
out well with the video camera as well.

I would _strongly_ recommend that you read at least one decent book on the
basics of exposure--I'm sorry that I don't have a good
recommendation--"The Camera" by Ansel Adams is excellent (Adams was one
of the great photographers and also a superb teacher) but the author died
more than 20 years ago so needless to say it hasn't been updated for a
while-that's the one I learned from a very long time ago. I see a lot of
recommendations for the various Hedgecoe books but the reviews on Amazon
haven't been too good. Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" might be
a good bet. Once you understand how the pieces fit together you might be
able to figure out what you need without further help.






Thanks in advance one and all!



--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt