Hi,

None of my P&S cameras can take good picture in low light.
I am wondering why... beside lack of skill...

Is it because the lens on these cameras are small... so, they can't let enough light to go into the cameras?

Will a camera with a big lens (in term of diameter) take better low light picture?

 

Getting a tripod would be a good first step. Yes, cameras with faster lenses perform better in low light, but a tripod is an essential tool for shooting in low light situations regardless of the camera.

Since your camera is selecting slower shutter speeds for the conditions, I'm assuming your pics are coming out blurry, and that's what you mean by "None of my P&S cameras can take good picture in low light." Since the shutter is open longer, it's near impossible to hold the camera steady by hand without blurring the image. That's where the tripod comes in.

 

I did try to use a tripod but people were running around.
So, it didn't help much.

I usually used one of those big hand-held halogen flashlight and pointed it to the ceiling. So, the picture looked a little bit more natural.

I also tried to increase the ISO speed but pictures came out with alot of noise with my P&S.

I have seen some of the P&S have big lens. (like some of the Kodak) Will that help? How can you tell if a P&S can talk good low light picture?

I was thinking to get a SLR but I realized that it would not help since I didn't have enough skill to use a SLR.

 

The 'people running around' part will never change, regardless of what camera. You either need to find a better angle, wait for less people, ignore the other motion blur (Don't think a picture needs to be 100% sharp to be good. On the contrary, A little motion blur can makes a shot more interesting), or use higher ISO for a shorter shutter. Typically, you need a mix of the above.

The keys to picking a P&S camera that works better in low light:
1) The lens should have a low F stop number. If you shoot at F2.8 you will need a lower shutter than you will at say, F4. Lower = better.
2) A stabilized lens will reduce motion blur. I'll let you look at reviews for more description.
3) Some cameras are noisier at higher ISOs than others. The recent Fuji cameras have exceptional high ISO ability.
4) Keep in mind many cameras have a lower F stop if you don't zoom as much.

Generally, a bigger lens means it can 'see' more light, but don't count on it.

If you are willing to carry an SLR and a lens/external flash around, I would consider one. None of us had any skills when we first got our cameras either.

 

Just to clarify, IS will minimize motion blur resulting from camera shake, but it will not do anything for subject motion. If you're shooting moving subjects in low light with a camera without a fast lens, you'll either have to use flash to freeze motion and live with background blur, or step up and get faster glass. Even then, low light shooting can be challenging.

To the OP, if you feel comfortable enough with the basics of photography with your current camera, stepping up to an SLR might be a good option, just keep in mind the considerable increase in cost, the steeper learning curve, and the fact that you'll be buying into a system of lenses more than the camera itself. You'll also probably need to become more involved in post processing.

The body is only the start. Cost can rapidly spiral upward from there.

 

Sorry to ask but I don't know much.

What is a "fast" lens? Where do you find a "fast" lens? Who make a "fast" lens? Is a "fast" lens good for most everything?



Is this one a "fast" lens?
hmmm... they all says they have a "fast" lens.... So... I should ask:
How "fast" is fast?

* Fast f2.8-8.0
* 24 mm wide angle lens
* 5.8x optical zoom, professional-quality Schneider-Kreuznach Variogon Optical Zoom Lens featuring manual zoom and focus rings

 

Read this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/shutteraperture.htm

'fast' is relative.

A faster lens has a Smaller F number. It also means it lets in more light, and a not-accurate-but-simple-way to remember it is: you can get the same amount of light with a faster shutter speed. In general, the faster the better.

In your case, The relevant spec is: F2.8-8.0 which means:
F2.8 at wide angle, F8 when zoomed.
See: http://www.photonhead.com/beginners/...ndaperture.php
F8 is three 'stops' away from F2.8, which means your shutter speed will be
2^3 = 8 times longer. That's a lot. So shoot wide angle and crop.

In the SLR world, it has more signifigant meanings, but I would't sweat those details yet.

 

Fast as in a lens with a wider maximum aperture allows you to set a faster shutter speed for a given situation, hence it's a "faster" lens. So, an f2.8 setting is faster than an f4 setting (twice as fast in fact) because it allows you to set a quicker shutter speed to still get a proper exposure.

f2.8 is pretty fast, especially for a longer focal length lens. Each whole stop down, that is smaller, halves the amount of light let in.

Whole stops:
1.4
2
2.8
4
5.6
8
11
16
22

Each represents a halving or doubling of the amount of light let in through the lens, depending which way you go on the scale. The smaller the number, the larger the aperture and vice versa.

Your problem lies in the point and shoots in general. As a whole, they usually don't have very wide max apertures, at least not at longer focal lengths.

Maybe Dan or someone else can speak to the newer models, which I'm sure have improved.

 

Having a "faster" lens won't always solve your problem. The wider you open the aperture (lower F stop number) the less depth of field you'll be able to capture. For example with my 50mm F/1.4, if I use an f stop of 1.4 and take a portrait of a human face, there is a possibility that I can get the nose in focus but you'll be able to perceive everything else as out of focus. If I kick it up to an F/4, you'll see the whole face in focus (nose, eyes, etc).

You can't simply solve the problem with a faster lens...it will help, but it won't solve the issue, at least not without causing another. What you need is a camera that has better capabilities with higher ISO values to be used in lower light situations. If your intent is to take photos of moving objects in lower light, you’ll need to research other cameras that are more capable in this field. However, for still images you can use a tripod + lower ISO + longer exposure and obtain a good quality picture.

 

If you're shooting a moving target, clean high-ISO performance and a fast lens is what you're looking for. Since you're not interested in an SLR, take a look at the Fuji F30.

 

If I understand correctly, the key is to have a camera that can take picture with high(er) ISO with little noise.

But... of course... that particular camera will not be able take picture in other situration...

So, having a P&S camera that have low noise in high ISO may not be a good camera.

There is no such thing as one-size-fit-all lens in photography in which all the companies are trying to do with their P&S.

If I really need to do this, I need to have something that I can change the lens for every situration.

 

Maybe I asked the wrong question.

I wanted to take a picture of my garden under overcast cloudy situration. It was bright enough for my eyes but not so with my camera.

If I set the camera to AUTO, the camera set the shuttle speed to 1/30 but did not pop out the flash.

I was using a tripod but it was kinda windy. So, the picture came out burry.

So, I tried to increase the shuttle speed to 1/40 but the picture came out dark. I tried to turn on the flash to force the camera to pick a faster shuttle speed. This increased the shuttle speed. The picture was a little bit sharper but still dark.

In this situration, what other trick can I do?

Now I think I will try to set the camera to a higher ISO. But I doubt my camera can do that since anything higher than 200 will be fuzzy with my camera.

Will a SLR or the F30 handle this kind of situration better (with someone with no skill)?

 

A camera that can take pics with little noise at high-iso can certainly take clean pics at low-iso as well. You're not forced to use high-iso all the time, in fact, it will always default to the lowest possible iso and only increase it if there is no other way to expose the scene correctly.

 

In the last year, P&S manufacturers have developed new techniques for fighting sensor noise which is responsible for the grain you see in high-iso. It's not as good as using a low-noise sensor as you would find in a DSLR, but they're getting much better. The Fuji F30 can use ISO 400 without much damage to the picture and ISO 800 can be used in a pinch.

A dark, windy day wil be a challenge for any camera. If you want to shoot flowers in those conditions, you can use a little clamp attached to your tripod to hold the flower still. Here's a popular one for macro shooters: http://www.tripodhead.com/products/plamp-main.

 

dead link.
But I wanted to shoot an area of my garden. not just one flower. So... bottom line is that I have got to get a SLR with big lens to do this?

Can I hang a bunch of white tower or cloth or paper all over the place to point more light to the area that I want to shoot? Will this work with my P&S?

or... I don't know what a lens hood is for... but if I add a lens hood to the lens, will this make the camera to collect more light?

The hood thing is like a funal... right? The bigger the funal, the more water it will collect... So, this should be the same with light...

 

You don't have to have an SLR to shoot this, nor do you need a big lens. It sounds like you want to shoot this flower in low light no matter what, so you'll need a tripod and a longer exposure. Dan was just explaining how high ISO performance differs between compacts and SLR's.

Have you considered shooting the garden when the light is a little better? Your idea about reflecting light into your shooting area also might work. Try it. Also, if it's windy, just wait for a time when it's not.

As to lens hoods, they are not for gathering light, they are for preventing it from entering your lens. Light entering directly into the lens from a bright source can cause lens flare and other issues that degrade image quality.

Also, when you write "big lens," it implies a telephoto or long zoom lens. A fast lens, one with a wide max aperture, doesn't have to be big at all. The 50mm f1.4 lens mentioned above is quite compact and light, as are many other fast lenses.

Just remember that shooting digital is essentially free, so don't be afraid to just shoot away and try different approaches. Try all the things mentioned above, and I'd bet you get the result your looking for. Then you can post it here.

 

bz268, the lens hood is just a shade for your lens. It prevents flare from unwanted light sources from entering your lens, it doesn't make it gather any more light.

Shooting moving subjects at night is very difficult, even if you have an expensive DSLR. It comes down to technique over anything else. If something is moving, you want to stop it from moving. If you can't stop it from moving, you'll want to light it so you can use a faster shutter speed.

If you need to raise your shutter speed to compensate for movement, you need to change one of following things to compensate:
1) shoot in better light, either at a brighter time during the day, or by adding artificial light
2) Use a flash (basically an extension of option 1)
3) shoot with a bigger aperture
4) Raise the ISO

Options 1 and 2 are your best options. However, if you don't want to use your flash, and you can't shoot with more light, then you'll have to turn to your camera for options 3 and 4. If your camera isn't providing satisfactory results from raising the ISO, or if it doesn't have a big enough aperture, then you need an equipment upgrade.

Personally, I think you just need to work within the limits of your gear. If you want to shoot a moving subject, shoot in daylight or use your flash. You won't find many botanists taking pictures of their flowers at night.

The link is broken because a site that happens to have the same initials as a "C F M" file is being blocked. Go to http://www.tripodhead.com and click on the "Plamp" link on the left if you're interested in the clamp I was linking to.

 

> I wanted to take a picture of my garden under overcast cloudy situration.
> .... it was kinda windy.

I Agree - You are taking pictures under a ridiculously difficult situation?
I think you are asking a bit too much here. You can still get an acceptable picture,
but under these conditions, 'Acceptable' means 'doesn't totally look like crap'

This picture, under the circumstances, I was pretty happy with:


Isn't it really blurry? Yes.
On the other hand: It was a fairly dark tunnel, and I'm shooting one handed while riding a bicycle.




> It was bright enough for my eyes but not so with my camera.
Cameras always have less dynamic range than the eyes. Sad but true.

> If I understand correctly, the key is to have a camera that can take picture with high(er) ISO with little noise.
> So, having a P&S camera that have low noise in high ISO may not be a good camera.
You are making this a bit too complicated. It's quite simple.

To avoid motion blur, you need a fast enough shutter such that your subject and your camera don't move much while
the shutter is open. The less movement the better. Less movement means tripod, or a steady camera stance, or
Stabilization which reduces movement. Faster shutter means: Smaller F stop, higher ISO.

Or usually, a combination of any of the above.

> If I set the camera to AUTO, the camera set the shuttle speed to 1/30 but did not pop out the flash.
> I tried to turn on the flash to force the camera ..... still dark.
Flashes have limited ranges, as you saw.


> I was using a tripod but it was kinda windy. So, the picture came out burry.
If the tripod was shaking, you need a heavier tripod. Or, hang something on the tripod to make it heavier.
Or don't use a tripod, and put the camera down on a surface.

If the flowers were moving due to wind, and they are blurry, you need a faster shutter speed. Again,
flowers + wind + night = fat chance. (rounded down)


> Now I think I will try to set the camera to a higher ISO.
> But I doubt my camera can do that since anything higher than 200 will be fuzzy with my camera.
Then use 200. Or use 400, since it's going to be a fuzzy picture anyway.

> Will a SLR or the F30 handle this kind of situration better (with someone with no skill)?
yes, because you could in theory shoot at a really high ISO like 1600 or 3200.

 

ok.. enough of talk... how did you take that picture of yours?

some sort of sorcerery!!!!

 

Basically...... luck.

I was switching between ISOs, and I just kept shooting and shooting as I went through the tunnel. I shot about 50-60 pictures or so, and this was the best one, by far. Most of them were lovely works of art like:

(which is actually kind of neat in its own way too)

 

what was the shuttle speed and ISO for that good looking picture of yours?
I will have to try that with my camera.

 

If you use the same shutter speed, aperture, and ISO as him, you would need to shoot in exactly the same light for the picture to be exposed properly. Just knowing that it was dark isn't good enough. When you go to take the picture it might be brighter or darker than when he took the picture.

All we can do is give you guidelines such as "use a high ISO" or "use a large aperture" because we can't meter your lighting conditions over the internet. Your camera needs to do that at the time you take the picture.

The last time you shot the flower in the garden, your camera decided that 1/30th of a second would expose the scene correctly. However, after you took the shot you saw that it was blury. To prevent that from happening, you need to increse the shutter speed. When you do that, you need to increase your ISO to compensate, otherwise you'll end up with a dark photo.

If you double your shutter speed from 1/30th of a second to 1/60th of a second, you need to double your ISO (i.e. from 100 to 200 or from 200 to 400).

The first thing any camera will try to do if the scene is too dark is to open the aperture as large as possible, so you probably don't have to worry about anything there. Just focus on your shutter speed and ISO.

 

Hmm... maybe that is the reason that I need to get a SLR with a big lens. The P&S has a tiny hole that can't open wide enough to let more light to go in....


The F30 can do better because of the software, right?

 

The "hole" (aperture) can be smaller on a P&S cam because the sensor is smaller. If a P&S camera has an f/2.8 aperture, it's the same as having an f/2.8 lens on an SLR.

SLR's typically use zoom lenses in the f/2.8 to f/5.6 range, so they won't really be any faster than what you have now. Remember, smaller "f" numbers mean the lenses let more light in. You can buy lenses as fast as f/1.2 for SLRs, but they don't zoom.

The Fuji performs better than most P&S cameras because it's sensor is less noisy and the firmware is better at filtering noise. This lets you use higher ISO's than you would on other P&S cameras and still get a clean image. Higer ISO = faster shutter speed = less blurry night photos.

SLR's have very clean high ISO performance, so that will make the biggest difference in your night shooting ability, but it still can't perform miracles.