[Emay]

You hit the coloration issues right on the head. That's because you went outside the cameras capabilities with the given natural light.

As a general rule a fast aperature allows for a faster shutter in dimmer light. Which in turn means you can get a crisper, sharper shot in darker settings. That's a big reason we chase those fast lenses that can shoot at Aperatures of 1.4 or 2.8

[TheUNZippee!]

I see. Thanks for the insight Erin.

[TheUNZippee!]

Question for you then Erin: What lens would you suggest for the XTi for shooting in low light conditions? I take it the generic 18-55 lens that came with the kit is not that great for such conditions, being that it only goes down to f3.5..... correct?

[06RedfireGT]

Setting the correct f-stop is a bitch at first. Check these out. The first one came out great, the whole car is in focus, the second one, the rear is in focus and the front is blurred, that is the effect I was going for, the last one, the f-stop was set too low and only part of the car was in focus, ruining the shot.

There is a fine line between, desired effect, and ruined shot.

Those were shot with an XTi BTW

F/6.3, 1/200th, ISO 200



F/2.8, 1/400th, ISO 100



f/2.8, 1/2, ISO 100

[TheUNZippee!]

Setup on aperture or shutter speed mode?

[06RedfireGT]

Those are all on manual mode.

[TheUNZippee!]

Gotcha. Now I have more learnins to do.

[Emay]

Zip, if a tripod is available, you can get very good shots without buying fast glass. Fast glass (2.8 and faster) is handy for when you can't control light and get stuck hand holding in poor lighting. It allows you to run an iso with less noise while keeping shutter speeds reasonable for good sharpness.

If you can avoid hand holding, your 18-55 will do plenty good on a tripod in low light shooting. I guess you just need to ask yourself, how much low light hand held photography am I going to do? Is it worth the expense?

A super lens would be a canon 24-70 2.8 L. eyeball the cost and I'm fairly certain most folks would pass.

Does the 18-55 you have, show the insignia like this: 3.5-5.6

If it does, it's fastest aperature at full zoom is 5.6 and when fully backed out is 3.5 understanding that will go a long way to. If your shooting in low light and you try taking a shot while fully zoomed, your not going to be afforded the 3.5 speed that you would when not zoomed. In those instances you will have to back out, and move your feet to get your desired composition without zooming at all to keep your 3.5 Ap for good background blur. Make sense? The lens begins to handicap you as darkness falls.

[Emay]

Also wanted to mention, when you all are trying to get massive background blur the aperature doesn't need to be 2.8 or faster. You can get great bokeh at 4.0 or 5.6 as long as the subject is not right against that background you want blurred. For instance if your shooting the car against a wall, if you shoot even at 2.8, you will get wall details still. But if you pull the car away by ten or fifteen feet and shoot the same exact shot, that wall will have zero detail in it.

I don't have a car example, but this goose shows how poor lighting with a mediocre AP can land some serious back ground blur because the subject was forward of the background contents. This shot is at ISO400 (obviously poorly lit day with no sun and in shade to boot), AP of 4.0 and shutter of 1/500th of a second to get that tack sharp face while the damn thing was movin around on me.



only change here was the shutter at 1/400th:

[TheUNZippee!]

Originally Posted by Emay Zip, if a tripod is available, you can get very good shots without buying fast glass. Fast glass (2.8 and faster) is handy for when you can't control light and get stuck hand holding in poor lighting. It allows you to run an iso with less noise while keeping shutter speeds reasonable for good sharpness. If you can avoid hand holding, your 18-55 will do plenty good on a tripod in low light shooting. I guess you just need to ask yourself, how much low light hand held photography am I going to do? Is it worth the expense? A super lens would be a canon 24-70 2.8 L. eyeball the cost and I'm fairly certain most folks would pass. Does the 18-55 you have, show the insignia like this: 3.5-5.6 If it does, it's fastest aperature at full zoom is 5.6 and when fully backed out is 3.5 understanding that will go a long way to. If your shooting in low light and you try taking a shot while fully zoomed, your not going to be afforded the 3.5 speed that you would when not zoomed. In those instances you will have to back out, and move your feet to get your desired composition without zooming at all to keep your 3.5 Ap for good background blur. Make sense? The lens begins to handicap you as darkness falls.

Yes the 18-55 says 3.5-5.6.

When you say "Will allow you to run an ISO with less noise", I assume you mean that the fast lens would allow you to raise the ISO and not have to slow down shutter speed while not increasing noise?


Also, how effective in your opinion is the Canon EF 70-300mm IS lens I have. I'm looking at it.... this can't be right. It says "1:4 - 5.6" on the lens. Also says it's a 58mm lens.

What's with the '1:4', not 1.4' ? And what is this particular lens good at?

Thanks for all your help and info. I'm bookmarking these threads for reference.

[Lefty]

Honk

[Emay]

Originally Posted by Lefty Honk

Aflac

[Emay]

Zip, the 1:4 is a different way to post the aperature descriptor. It signifies 4.0-5.6 They threw the 1: in front on some lens versions.

The 58mm means it is a 58mm lens thread diameter, so you can use 58mm filter accessories and attachments.

Does that lens you have say it is "IS" image stabilization?

[TheUNZippee!]

Ah I see. Thank you. Yes the 70-300 is an IS lens. It was a pretty pricey unit if I recall. 550 bucks I think.

So what types of shooting is this particular lens good for? Obviously being a telephoto zoomer it's for longer distance shooting; I just figured you would have perhaps specific types of shots this lens would be good for.

[Emay]

For car photography, I would use it in good light, from a distance zoomed in to about 225mm or 250mm. That lens is very sharp there. What this does is allow you the opportunity to use it's sharp focal lengths with decent aperatures.

Hand held in other areas of photography - definately good for some outdoor sports in good light. Use a monopod if lighting degrades, so you can still pan and shoot on a horizontal plane. Indoor sports like basketball become tough because the overhead lighting is usually poor (speaking High school and such) pro basketball generally has great lighting and the lens would work well.

That's a pretty universal lens honestly. Huge focal capability overall. Might be a tad slow in comparison to the real high end stuff, but for a hobbyist, does a good variety of shots and that IS is handy as a crutch at times.. Especiallyfor a jittery fugger like me..

[TheUNZippee!]

Lmao@jittery Erin.


Awesome. I owe you a beer or six should we ever meet up somewhere. As stated, I have this thread bookmarked, which comes in handy for me. Being that I'm only home two days a week, and I'm 40 and losing my mammary, it takes me longer to remember and apply all this stuff. If the camera was mine and I could take it on the road, I'd learn mo' betta faster.

But until I score my own SLR, this will work.

See, I've always thought I needed a nice p&s camera for the one handed, no look shots I take on the road.

Think an SLR could fit that bill? With my S5-IS, I literally pick the camera up, set the mode, zoom if needed, and shoot, through the windshield, with one hand and without ever looking at the display. Without ever taking my eyes off the road.

[Emay]

You can in some of the auto settings you have been using, and probably get some really great shots.

On the move, I would use AV mode to do it, so you just have to pick a depth of field and shoot. The shutter will be adjusted by the camera itself leaving you less to worry about. Very easy to do hand held.

However, if you got some big bug splatters on that windshield of yours, the auto focus may focus on that and not capture the true focal point. You run the same risk with the P&S though I believe..

[TheUNZippee!]

Originally Posted by Emay You can in some of the auto settings you have been using, and probably get some really great shots. On the move, I would use AV mode to do it, so you just have to pick a depth of field and shoot. The shutter will be adjusted by the camera itself leaving you less to worry about. Very easy to do hand held. However, if you got some big bug splatters on that windshield of yours, the auto focus may focus on that and not capture the true focal point. You run the same risk with the P&S though I believe..

Interesting. Yeah, I always keep the windshield clean.

Side note: Invisible Glass | Miracle Cleaning Products | Glass Cleaner

Best glass cleaner ever if you've not heard of it, might I add. Dirty windshield drives me nutso.


Hmmm. Might have to ask the wife for an SLR for my bd next May. Have to start scoping out what would be a good SLR, and lens, to use in my particular application.

Again, you're awesome. Thanks bro. Sorry to pester you with constant questions. lol

[07 STROKER]

those cracks in your windshield?

[TheUNZippee!]

Nope. Just reflections from an overhead power line.