If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
Hi, all.
I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light in there was pretty low, overall. I'd compare the lighting with a sporadically lit street in the middle of the night: there are spotlights illuminating the attractions, and a lot of darker areas between. When I went last year, I had a Nikon Coolpix 4500 with the stock speedlight. Results were pretty marginal overall. That camera did not write in RAW either, which in hindsight cost me quite a bit in the ability to post-process. Now I'm going with a 6MP Canon Rebel, a 17-85IS, a 75-300IS, a 50mm f/1.4, and a Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro, which I will be getting my hands on when I get into the State. I also have a Canon EX550 flash. I feel fairly well-armed for the trip. No L lenses, but what can I say. I'm expecting that with the better low-light behavior of the Rebel, and with the maximum aperture of the 50mm and 150mm lenses, I should be able to capture some excellent low-light shots. I intend to try some shots at the maximum aperture of my two prime lenses, and also some tighter aperture settings, with a flash if required. I really don't want to go past ISO100, because I want the richest possible results. Aside from the depth-of-field differences, what other kinds of differences should I expect between wide-open shots and shots of, say, f/16 or higher? Is the clarity necessarily better? BTW - I will be armed with a tripod and a remote. Any general technique-related suggestions for a shot in a lower-light environment? All suggestions I can glean before I go would be greatly appreciated. - Oh - I will be shooting everything in RAW. I guess I should figure out how to use the mirror delay in my camera, for one thing. ;-) Thanks!! BD |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
Why digital?
Digital sensors don't accummulate light like film.... BD wrote: Hi, all. I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light in there was pretty low, overall. I'd compare the lighting with a sporadically lit street in the middle of the night: there are spotlights illuminating the attractions, and a lot of darker areas between. When I went last year, I had a Nikon Coolpix 4500 with the stock speedlight. Results were pretty marginal overall. That camera did not write in RAW either, which in hindsight cost me quite a bit in the ability to post-process. Now I'm going with a 6MP Canon Rebel, a 17-85IS, a 75-300IS, a 50mm f/1.4, and a Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro, which I will be getting my hands on when I get into the State. I also have a Canon EX550 flash. I feel fairly well-armed for the trip. No L lenses, but what can I say. I'm expecting that with the better low-light behavior of the Rebel, and with the maximum aperture of the 50mm and 150mm lenses, I should be able to capture some excellent low-light shots. I intend to try some shots at the maximum aperture of my two prime lenses, and also some tighter aperture settings, with a flash if required. I really don't want to go past ISO100, because I want the richest possible results. Aside from the depth-of-field differences, what other kinds of differences should I expect between wide-open shots and shots of, say, f/16 or higher? Is the clarity necessarily better? BTW - I will be armed with a tripod and a remote. Any general technique-related suggestions for a shot in a lower-light environment? All suggestions I can glean before I go would be greatly appreciated. - Oh - I will be shooting everything in RAW. I guess I should figure out how to use the mirror delay in my camera, for one thing. ;-) Thanks!! BD |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
BD wrote:
Hi, all. I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light in there was pretty low, overall. I'd compare the lighting with a sporadically lit street in the middle of the night: there are spotlights illuminating the attractions, and a lot of darker areas between. When I went last year, I had a Nikon Coolpix 4500 with the stock speedlight. Results were pretty marginal overall. That camera did not write in RAW either, which in hindsight cost me quite a bit in the ability to post-process. Now I'm going with a 6MP Canon Rebel, a 17-85IS, a 75-300IS, a 50mm f/1.4, and a Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro, which I will be getting my hands on when I get into the State. I also have a Canon EX550 flash. I feel fairly well-armed for the trip. No L lenses, but what can I say. I'm expecting that with the better low-light behavior of the Rebel, and with the maximum aperture of the 50mm and 150mm lenses, I should be able to capture some excellent low-light shots. I intend to try some shots at the maximum aperture of my two prime lenses, and also some tighter aperture settings, with a flash if required. I really don't want to go past ISO100, because I want the richest possible results. Aside from the depth-of-field differences, what other kinds of differences should I expect between wide-open shots and shots of, say, f/16 or higher? Is the clarity necessarily better? f/16 will likely not be the sharpest setting, more likely around f/8, this depends on the lens. I have not used the 50mm 1.4 lens but I know the 50mm 1.8 gets way sharper if you can shoot at f 2.8. BTW - I will be armed with a tripod and a remote. Any general technique-related suggestions for a shot in a lower-light environment? All suggestions I can glean before I go would be greatly appreciated. - Oh - I will be shooting everything in RAW. I guess I should figure out how to use the mirror delay in my camera, for one thing. ;-) Don't know about the Rebal but the mirror delay on the 20D is a snap to use and for long exposures can make a big differance. So go in a dark room in your house and try all this out now while it does not matter, you will find out what works and what does not. Scott |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
UC wrote:
Why digital? Digital sensors don't accummulate light like film.... Which is why most of us no longer use film. Scott |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
So go in a dark room in your house and try all this out now while it
does not matter, you will find out what works and what does not. Makes sense. Emulate the conditions and experiment. If I only had a room in my house the size of 2 football fields, I'd be able to approximate even better! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
On 9 Dec 2005 17:35:51 -0800, Scott W wrote:
Which is why most of us no longer use film. It's been a long time since I've seen any reminders of that useless troll. Better to starve the beast than feed him with your attention, his favorite meal. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
"BD" wrote in message oups.com... Hi, all. I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light I was just there with my 350d back in September. I was armed with my 50mm 1.4, the 18-55 kit lens, and my 28-300mm tamron. I really wanted to use the 50, but after a few shots it was very obvious that I needed a wider angle. I ended up using the kit lens for most of my shots. Most of them were in the 2-3sec range. I only had a monopod with me so I would hold it braced against the railing. I was suprised that any of them turned out. I have a few posted on my web page if you want to get some ideas of the conditions. I definatley made good use of the wired remote. It was hard enough not moving the camera. Occasionally someone down the path would bump the railing and I would have to start over. You should be better off with the tripod, but the wife and I were on our motorcycle and I was cramped for space. I think someone else mentioned to stay in the middle of your f range and I'll tell you now that the caverns will simple laugh at your flash. I have the sigma ef500 flash and it was pretty useless. You best bet is to go with the longer exposures on the tripod. Good luck and enjoy the trip. We did! http://www.hamptonfamily.us/NMTrip/index.html PS: if you get a chance, go on over west to white sands. That was the photo-highlight of our trip! Michael Hampton |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
What stunning photos!
-- Joan http://joan.colley.name:85 "Michael Hampton" wrote in message news:x0umf.9831$7r6.1000@trnddc07... http://www.hamptonfamily.us/NMTrip/index.html |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
Michael Hampton wrote:
"BD" wrote in message oups.com... Hi, all. I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light I was just there with my 350d back in September. I was armed with my 50mm 1.4, the 18-55 kit lens, and my 28-300mm tamron. I really wanted to use the 50, but after a few shots it was very obvious that I needed a wider angle. I ended up using the kit lens for most of my shots. Most of them were in the 2-3sec range. I only had a monopod with me so I would hold it braced against the railing. I was suprised that any of them turned out. I have a few posted on my web page if you want to get some ideas of the conditions. I definatley made good use of the wired remote. It was hard enough not moving the camera. Occasionally someone down the path would bump the railing and I would have to start over. You should be better off with the tripod, but the wife and I were on our motorcycle and I was cramped for space. I think someone else mentioned to stay in the middle of your f range and I'll tell you now that the caverns will simple laugh at your flash. I have the sigma ef500 flash and it was pretty useless. You best bet is to go with the longer exposures on the tripod. Good luck and enjoy the trip. We did! http://www.hamptonfamily.us/NMTrip/index.html PS: if you get a chance, go on over west to white sands. That was the photo-highlight of our trip! Michael Hampton Hey neat photos. We were there in 1998, at that time I had 0.3 MP camera. One of your photos is just about the same as mine, but yours has a LOT more detail http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/53364943/original http://www.hamptonfamily.us/NMTrip/slides/IMG_0014.html It is clear this thing is not growing very fast at all. Scott |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
QUESTION: Small vs wide aperture shots in low light
BD wrote:
Hi, all. I'm headed to Carlsbad, New Mexico next weekend, to wander through the Caverns for a couple of days. I have been there once before. The light in there was pretty low, overall. I'd compare the lighting with a sporadically lit street in the middle of the night: there are spotlights illuminating the attractions, and a lot of darker areas between. Foget the flash in the caves. It will only flatten the scene and wash out the details. You're better off using available light. Tripod, ISO 100, and 30 seconds to a minute, depending on aperture. Shoot RAW, and you'll be MUCH more able to effectively deal with the weird mixture of lighting types they have in there. Here's a shot I took there last year: http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/37442910/original -Mark |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Infinite field depth, a good thing? | Rich | Digital SLR Cameras | 5 | November 4th 05 09:47 PM |
Infinite depth of field? | Rich | Digital Photography | 1 | November 3rd 05 02:43 AM |
Stupid Question: Aperture | one_of_many | Large Format Photography Equipment | 8 | June 24th 04 06:15 PM |
Kiev 88 question - Light leaks | Yannis Exidaridis | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 5 | February 9th 04 04:30 PM |
f-stop to light transmission % ratio question | f/256 | In The Darkroom | 1 | January 25th 04 04:07 AM |