Still struggling with night shots

[Doylem]

Does it really matter if two cameras seem to require different exposure values for night photography? I love shooting late in the evening, but I really don't fret about f-stops. I just put the camera on a tripod, set the camera to 'manual' and make a test shot with a 'best guess' exposure. A couple of shots later, after a bit of tweaking, I'm sorted...

 

[jwt]

Well, not really. In the original post, you had the P&S at f/2.8, and the DSLR at either f/3.5 or f/4.

Yeah, you're right. But I did try the f/4 at 1/4 sec shutter time on the dSLR, and it was still very dark compared to the powershot at f/2.8 at 1/8 sec. The two let in equivalent amounts of light, right? It seems that only by bumping the ISO up to the extreme end, was I able to achieve good exposure. I just seems to me that's a band-aid approach, and will result in an unnecessarily noisy image.

 

[quesofrito]

i'm not so familiar with your particular DSLR, but are you shooting these images in RAW? if not, maybe the jpg algorithm is automatically setting the contrast level and pushing some of those gray pixels to black?

you should be shooting raw, though!

you could also get that (relatively) cheap 35mm F2.0 lens. 35mm is the perfect focal length for landscapes and interiors, if you ask me.

 

[MacUserSince87]

Results as expected...

Getting to the point of the question the difference in the results in the photos are due to 1) the fact all three are shot at different apertures, and 2) Photo 1 and Photos 2&3 are shot with a different camera which may have different actual ISO speeds (don't believe the numbers on the menu).

If you every use a Canon DSLR with studio lighting and a hand held incident meter you will find that all your photos exposed per the hand held meter wind up about 1/3 stop underexposed. That's because the Canon ISO speeds are actually higher than their nominal values. ISO 100 is actually around 120. So to get accurate results its necessary to enter an exposure compensation factor into the hand held meter. My metering tutorial explains how to do that with a Sekonic L-358 if anyone is interested: http://super.nova.org/DPR/Ratios/

Chuck Gardner

 

[840quadra]

Yeah, you're right. But I did try the f/4 at 1/4 sec shutter time on the dSLR, and it was still very dark compared to the powershot at f/2.8 at 1/8 sec. The two let in equivalent amounts of light, right? It seems that only by bumping the ISO up to the extreme end, was I able to achieve good exposure. I just seems to me that's a band-aid approach, and will result in an unnecessarily noisy image.

Frankly I don't think you are ready for the DSLR lifestyle. Your points and gripes are typical of someone that doesn’t understand all of the workings involved with getting a usable image. Your also seem to be using the common defense similar to " Well I paid more for this camera than my P&S, it better take nicer images straight away, in all situations!". Sadly that isn't the way things work in the DSLR world, in all (and unfortunate) honesty, you have to "Pay-to-Play".

That does little to help you as you said yourself that you can't justify the price to get good glass (lenses) for your camera. People have given you advice, you are either ignoring it, or blowing things out of proportion (in my opinion).

You don't need to crank the ISO up to 1600 to get an awesome night shot with your camera. Great shots can be achieved with much lower ISO settings (low noise), with exposures of a second or less (depending on settings). Take a look at some of the good photography sharing sites, download some pictures, and look at the EXIF data, and experiment with an "open mind".

 

[volvoben]

Here's my distillation of the important points:

-Now that ISO, aperture etc. have been explained to you, experiment with higher ISO in handheld night shots.

-realize that 99% of night shots require a tripod or physical stabilization of some sort. I've taken many good shots with my camera set on a railing or curb etc. I also carry a tiny $30 Bogen tripod in my bag, it's very useful. Night photography requires a tripod, especially if you want clear shots with high depth of field, it's a nuisance, but even in 15 years i seriously doubt technology will allow a high quality handheld night shot. If you only need indoor snapshots without flash, just crank the ISO.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Why is this thread going so far?

Your trying to shoot with two completely different cameras that are fine tuned to give you completely different results. The f-stop difference should be a no brainer by now. I can understand if you didn't know it at first by now five different members have explained it.

There is no reason to further test and compare a point and shoot to a Rebel, why are you doing it in the first place? The P&S was constructed, tested and engineered to give as good a result as a consumer (soccer mom) would want without putting any thought into it. They were meant to correct people's bad mistakes in lighting so it will yeild you a better image through JPEG processing. As well as the fact that the aperture is set to 2.8 and the lens to sensor distance is rather short.

The Rebel is set to 3.5 and 4 which aren't as wide as 2.8 and therefore not letting in that much light. Not to forget that the lens to sensor distance is longer.

These two cameras aren't even in the same catagory, testing a 5D and a Rebel would lead to more useful results. Testing a point and shoot and an SLR is a bit unnecessary.