Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Do I Get My Expensive Camera To Take Low-Light Pictures As Good As My Old 2MP?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How Do I Get My Expensive Camera To Take Low-Light Pictures As Good As My Old 2MP?

    I was going through some old photos tonight and found these two shots, taken in New Orleans:





    These were taken with a Sony Mavica 2MP point and shoot. The photos were actually saved to floppy discs!

    These photos were taken without a flash or a tripod. No settings to adjust, as this was a point-and-shoot. And although a little noisy, they really are pretty good low-light shots.

    Both of these shots were taken in 2002. Since then, I've owned a 5MP Kodak EasyShare, and my current Pentax K10. I've been unable to get low-light shots comparable to the old Sony with either camera without decreasing the shutter speed and mounting the camera on a tripod (not really an option for these types of shots).

    Am I missing something? Is there something I'm not doing? Or was that old Sony something special?

  • #2
    Originally posted by johnstp View Post
    I was going through some old photos tonight and found these two shots, taken in New Orleans:
    ....

    ....

    These were taken with a Sony Mavica 2MP point and shoot. The photos were actually saved to floppy discs!

    These photos were taken without a flash or a tripod. No settings to adjust, as this was a point-and-shoot. And although a little noisy, they really are pretty good low-light shots.

    Both of these shots were taken in 2002. Since then, I've owned a 5MP Kodak EasyShare, and my current Pentax K10. I've been unable to get low-light shots comparable to the old Sony with either camera without decreasing the shutter speed and mounting the camera on a tripod (not really an option for these types of shots).

    Am I missing something? Is there something I'm not doing? Or was that old Sony something special?
    Digital Cameras have to compute the white light for the photo. Analog photo's added it in the development process.

    So, there is a lag from the time you press the shutter while it figures the white light. The higher the resolution, the longer the time. So without a tripod or something to hold the camera perfectly still, you won't get the crispness you get with an analog or lower resolution digital.

    What you might look into is a mount that attaches to your chest with straps and has three struts that culminate in a mount for the camera. It's adjustable. that way you can "hand hold" the camera and point and shoot with no movement.

    Hawk
    "If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson

    Comment


    • #3
      The short answer: Despite marketing, camera technology beyond mega pixels has increased very little in 8 years. I purchased a 2001-2003 Nikon D1H over the D2H or D2HS because the noise on the D1H was highly comparable at 1600 over the other two cameras that sell used for 2-3x the price. The problem with mega pixels will require you to read at least the next paragraph!!

      Compact cameras peaked at 4MP. A good way to think of it is like this. As you cram more pixels into a fixed area, the pixels get crowded. The crowding creates more interaction between pixels (they are charged photosites) and creates noise when the charged sites interfere with one another.

      I'm highly doubtful when you print those 2MP shots they will look as good as if you were to go back with the DSLR. I'd agree the Kodak probably would do worse because of what I posted in the previous paragraph, but a DSLR has a sensor about 5X as big as a digital compact so the pixels are more spread out. However, the Nikon D1H and D2H used less pixels but had cleaner images at high ISO than the other cameras of their era because the photosites were larger and created less interference between neighboring sites.

      Other issues are the size of the DSLR, it takes a while to get used to the heft. But once you do the camera weight should actually help to steady the camera. Realistically though you aren't getting clean images from anything at ISO 1600 whether it be a digital compact (i bet that mavica went to ISO 400 tops) or a film camera. And they won't be sharp without a tripod (or some bracing method) beyond 1/4 second even with SR turned on.

      As far as digital night shots, even the 2003 ist D did a great job up to 2 minutes, beyond that it got way to noisy. With film, you didn't have noise increases with time, but you had reciprocity failure where the different color layers would expose at different times and cause color shift. So you had to calculate the actual exposure time. That is, a shot you metered to be 10 minutes at f/2.8 might be 20 minutes at f/2.8 when reciprocity failure was factored in. If you didn't factor this in, your photo might come out green!!!

      I'm not sure about the white light thing. Maybe I'll learn something new after this post but I assume RedHawk is referring to White balance. However, a digital SLR calculates white balance instantly, as the lag between shutter press and release is about 35-50milliseconds, most modern FILM SLR's aren't any faster since they employ nearly all the same electronics. As a matter of fact the Nikon D2H had an external white balance sensor that worked in real time. It can be seen on the top of the mirror prism.

      With digital compacts the white balance is calculated real time since they don't have a mirror and the light always hits the sensor (which is why all compacts have live view capability). The lag on compacts is more a combination of things including manufacturers intentionally not taking it out so that you'd be forced to buy a DSLR for the "lack of shutter lag". However, most 2007/08 compacts are nearly lag less as well.

      This is the only non tripod mounted night shot I have that I can think of (although using my knee was sort of cheating )... K10D, 1 second, ISO1600, balanced on my knee, zone focused and f/2.8. Really a lot of things to kill the shot but the moment was captured that would have been lost had I pulled out the mono pod and mounted the camera. The quality is fine for web use or even a small print as in a newpaper but nothing higher quality.

      sigpic

      "As to every healthy boy with a taste for outdoor life, the northern forest -the Adirondacks- were to me a veritable land of enchantment." -Theodore Roosevelt

      Mountain Visions: The Wilderness Through My Eyes

      Comment


      • #4
        BTW, in reference to the shots you posted.

        The first one looks very good and a nice club scene shot. I always wanted to shoot a band at a club, or a concert. Only had one chance and that was as a spectator, not a photographer. The trolly one I don't think is all that great. It actually looks like the captures we'd occasionally pull of the digital 8mm tapes of a Sony camcorder (I think those are 1MP).

        I was hoping to get another shot at these in the future but my wifes cousin is no longer in the band so no more stage side passes!!!

        Trace Atkins in concert in Binghamton:
        sigpic

        "As to every healthy boy with a taste for outdoor life, the northern forest -the Adirondacks- were to me a veritable land of enchantment." -Theodore Roosevelt

        Mountain Visions: The Wilderness Through My Eyes

        Comment


        • #5
          I have a bunch of shots like that. My wife and I go to New Orleans every year for Jazz Fest. In the early days, I used to take the old Sony Mavica into the clubs with me at night and get lots of pix like that. No setup. No flash. No problem!

          Comment


          • #6
            Speaking of... here are some Jazz Fest shots from 2001 and 2002 taken with the Sony Mavica. They wouldn't hold up to a large print, but again, not bad for an old point-and-shoot that saved the photos onto a floppy disc!

            Irvin Mayfield


            Sherman Washington


            Pete Fountain


            Dwayne Dopsie


            Rockin' Dopsie (his brother)


            Diana Krall


            A fan...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by pico23 View Post
              This is the only non tripod mounted night shot I have that I can think of (although using my knee was sort of cheating )... K10D, 1 second, ISO1600, balanced on my knee, zone focused and f/2.8. Really a lot of things to kill the shot but the moment was captured that would have been lost had I pulled out the mono pod and mounted the camera. The quality is fine for web use or even a small print as in a newpaper but nothing higher quality.
              So did you use Auto White Balance? What is "zone focused?" My Canon XTi has "One Shot,"(stationary subject) "Al Focus,"(adaptable for both still and moving subjects) and " "Al Servo"(for fast-moving shots) modes. I can also set the point of focus manually or use auto AF point selection. Is this what you mean?
              BREATH OF FRESH AIR PHOTOGRAPHY Website
              Picasa Public Photo Gallery
              ADK46er #5438; CAT3500 #1745; CL50 #98; NPT Finisher

              Comment


              • #8
                I shoot everything in RAW so I don't ever worry about white balance. I usually just leave it on daylight or flourescent so the camera doesn't have to calculate anything. Daylight is 5000K at all times but flourescent varies. In RAW the white balance technically doesn't exist until you set it in conversion.

                It was manual focused with a guess on the players distance. Since I never actually looked through the viewfinder I set it to 28mm and 2.8 and 1600. I needed the 2.8 to get enough light as 1sec is pushing it even with SR/IS.
                sigpic

                "As to every healthy boy with a taste for outdoor life, the northern forest -the Adirondacks- were to me a veritable land of enchantment." -Theodore Roosevelt

                Mountain Visions: The Wilderness Through My Eyes

                Comment


                • #9
                  I also believe the more technical a camera, the more you need to find the right settings. It took me awhile to master my Olympus C-5060 (which I still have not totally mastered). I think it too is goingto take me quite awhile to learn the K10D. Also, could be the lens. That's why I almost bought the 50mm f1.4 for lowlight shooting. Pico can explain that better.
                  "The way I see it, you're hooked.Trout have you. Another soul lost." Elias Wonder, The Earth is Enough by Harry Middleton

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X