Can someone take a look? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/30/2009 07:43:07 PM · #1

If anyone has some time and wouldn't mind looking these over, I would appreciate the help.

I attempted my first night photo tonight. Just to practice. I was using a tripod, but there was some wind and it was cold. I took some photos of which these two are the best. I realize now that my ISO was 200 and maybe should have been higher. But I do have some questions. Why do I get so much glare on the lights? If my ISO was higher would I have gotten more definition to the houses in the distance? Whatever you can help me with would be great.

Thanks - Diane

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

12/30/2009 07:45:54 PM · #2

What was the shutter speed and aperture? Lower ISO means you probably had very long shutter speeds and thus th blowing out of the lights before the other darker details were exposed. Should use ISO 800 or 1600.

Disclaimer: not that I have much experience with night shooting.

Hope that helps.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

12/30/2009 07:50:09 PM · #3

Both were shot at F/22 - the Top one at 15s shutter and the bottom 8s.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

12/30/2009 07:52:52 PM · #4

First: I the the B & W is much better overall.

Second: In addition to using a larger aperture (think 4.5-5) and a higher ISO, I would strongly suggest waiting for a night with cloud cover. In cities the reflectivity of clouds will present much better results if you would like to illuminate more of the scene. Alternatively in the country (sometimes in the city, but I've usually had better luck with clouds), you can use the full moon to your advantage here.

Hope this is useful- Happy night shooting!

(One last thing-- Try shooting lightning at night, that'll light up your scene just fine ;), and it's fun too! )

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/30/2009 07:55:09 PM · #5

When I was shooting my thought process that F/22 would keep everything in focus. Would 4.5 - 5 make my edges blurry?

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/30/2009 08:02:50 PM · #6

Originally posted by DCrest01:

When I was shooting my thought process that F/22 would keep everything in focus. Would 4.5 - 5 make my edges blurry?

F/22 will definitely help to keep everything in focus... but you probably don't need to go that far, in fact stopping down that far will make the entire photo less sharp (diffraction).
Try starting with f/5.6, set focus to manual and adjust the focus for about 10 feet or so (assuming you're shooting with a wide angle lens). Keep your ISO low. Adjust shutter speed to get the desired amount of light.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/30/2009 08:06:03 PM · #7

Thank you. I will give that a try tomorrow night. Weather permitting I was hoping to get a morning landscape just as the sun is coming up. I will give the larger f/stop a try. Thanks again.

Diane

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/30/2009 10:54:54 PM · #8

I see by the EXIF on your two posted images that you were at 55mm, so not really wide angle. My 10 foot focus setting will probably, at f/5.6, give you slightly blurry objects at infinity, If so, move focus slightly toward infinity (from 10 feet to maybe 15 or 20 feet). At a focus setting of 20 feet, 55mm, f/5.6, everything from about 8 feet out to infinity should remain in focus.

Paulanton1

Olympus E-3

Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko Digital Zoom

01/01/2010 10:41:48 AM · #9

Hi Diane, I'll put in my 2 cents. I've had some success useing lower ISO's and lomger exposures with midrange apetures. I will usually use from f-10 to 15 withe Iso 100 - 400 and let the camera decide on exposuer length. Howerver I will say you need a sturdy tri-pod and once set up don't touch the camera. use either the timer to start the exposure or a remote. any jiggling will blur the shot, even your pressing the shutter release. hope this helps.

Scapeshots

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II

01/01/2010 10:50:50 AM · #10

Hi Diane,
I like to shoot night photography myself and pretty much agree with Paul. I typically leave the camera at ISO 100 unless 30 secs isnt enough time to bring in sufficient light. As Kirbic said shooting at F22 will lead to diffraction and the image wont come out quite as sharp. I typically shoot in Manual at ISO 100, F10-F14, and 20-30 secs depending on how bright things are. I think the best thing for you to do i experimanet and see what you can come up with. A sturdy tripod is definitely necessary. One other thing...if your camera has a Mirror lockup mode, i like to enable that just to get rid of the last bit of vibrations from the mirror slamming up and down. Just my 2 cents.....

JacksonGariety

Sony DSC-RX1

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

01/01/2010 02:47:00 PM · #11

Night photography most definitely requires a tripod and a high ISO. Since you had those lights in the distance, and since you were shooting at aÂ low ISO, you needed a higher shutter speed to compensate, therefore blowing out the lights but still leaving the rest of the image in darkness. That's the main problem here. If you were to do this again, you should have your camera on a tripod, with maybe a lower F/stop and an ISO of 800. If you've got noise reduction software, then go for 1600 ISO and maybe bump your f/stop up a bit.

Hope that was helpful! ;D

-

ColemanGariety

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/01/2010 05:34:32 PM · #12

Whether or not the lights are "blown out" is entirely independent of the ISO you are using, except to the extent that if you maintain a constant aperture and shutterspeed, the higher ISO will be exposed more than lower ISO. But that isn't how we work. So, in any given scene, the ratio between highlights and shadows remains constant, obviously, regardless of how you set your camera up. And if that range is any more than, say, 7 stops at most, then either the shadows will be underexposed or the highlights will be blown. ISO has nothing to do with it.

Now, using a tripod, you can easily make one exposure for the lights and another exposure for everything else, and then blend them together in photoshop; this is what we call "HDR" imaging.

R.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/01/2010 05:42:23 PM · #13

The weather has not cooperated the last two nights to go out and try again. I will try what everyone has suggested. I guess my next step will be getting a better tripod. I could not believe that even thought I could not feel a breeze, I could see the camera move. Also, Wizardry suggested locking the mirror. What effect does that have on the photo? And where would I look to see if I can do it? I'm using a Nikon D60 and D90.

Thanks as always.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

01/01/2010 05:57:59 PM · #14

Originally posted by DCrest01:

Also, Wizardry suggested locking the mirror. What effect does that have on the photo? And where would I look to see if I can do it? I'm using a Nikon D60 and D90.

When the mirror rises to begin the exposure, it slaps against its restraints quite noticeably, and this actually induces a slight vibration in the camera body. Mirror lockup is enabled through the custom functions menu; when you use it, the first click of the release raises the mirror, and the second click actuates the shutter. There's no real point in using it unless yopu have two things; a remote release and a stable tripod.

Apparently you don't have the latter, so that's your first step. And if you don't have one, you want a cable or wireless remote release for long-exposure photography. For any tripod-based photography, actually.

R.

01/01/2010 06:01:25 PM · #15

You are right. I do have a wireless remote. But I'm embarrassed to tell you I have an inexpensive tripod purchased locally. What would you recommend for a tripod that wouldn't break the after-Christmas bank?

NikonJeb

Nikon D850