Question about low light shooting

Vegan.Hiker

Vegan.Hiker

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
2,099
I've been searching the web and can't seem to find a straight answer to this question. If I am shooting a stationary scene in low light and want to keep the ISO low to keep it from getting noisy, is there an optical advantage to using a wider aperture lens as opposed to just using a tripod and a longer shutter speed?... assuming there is no motion and I have a tripod.

I went and shot a dark indoor scene last week and my lens only opens up to f4. I opened it up to f4, kept the shutter speed to around 1/20 and 1/60 since I was shooting hand held, but made the mistake of thinking it was okay to leave it in auto ISO and it shot in 3200. It initially looked okay on the LCD but when I looked on the computer there was too much noise for me to be happy with it. Do I need to just lower the ISO and shoot a longer shutter speed with the tripod, or do I need to get a f2 or wider lens to shoot this correctly? Or maybe the answer is I should learn to de-noise better in lightroom? I'm driving back to the scene today to try again with a tripod but I'm also considering stopping to buy a 12mm f2 lens on the way.

If my results were a limitation of my lens I don't mind spending the money, but I want to make sure I can't just correct this with a tripod and longer shutter to lower the ISO.
 
Vegan.Hiker said:
I've been searching the web and can't seem to find a straight answer to this question. If I am shooting a stationary scene in low light and want to keep the ISO low to keep it from getting noisy, is there an optical advantage to using a wider aperture lens as opposed to just using a tripod and a longer shutter speed?... assuming there is no motion and I have a tripod.

I went and shot a dark indoor scene last week and my lens only opens up to f4. I opened it up to f4, kept the shutter speed to around 1/20 and 1/60 since I was shooting hand held, but made the mistake of thinking it was okay to leave it in auto ISO and it shot in 3200. It initially looked okay on the LCD but when I looked on the computer there was too much noise for me to be happy with it. Do I need to just lower the ISO and shoot a longer shutter speed with the tripod, or do I need to get a f2 or wider lens to shoot this correctly? Or maybe the answer is I should learn to de-noise better in lightroom? I'm driving back to the scene today to try again with a tripod but I'm also considering stopping to buy a 12mm f2 lens on the way.

If my results were a limitation of my lens I don't mind spending the money, but I want to make sure I can't just correct this with a tripod and longer shutter to lower the ISO.
Click to expand...


Low light=tripod.

There is no optical advantage to using a faster lens on a stationary scene. If there isn't any movement, take as long as an exposure as you need. I'll often do 10 sec+ exposures in low light.

Remember to use a short delay from when you hit the shutter as well. I use a 2 second delay, or a separate trigger when doing longer exposures.
 
Awesome, thanks Dan! Heading back now to correct my ways. This is exactly what I'm going to try.
 
Like Dan I also use a tripod and 2 second delay but I also use mirror lockup. Good if your camera has a banging mirror as in optical DSLR.

Aperture is for setting your depth of field as in more of your image in total focus vs a nice creamy smooth background bokeh. It can definitely help in hand held low light shooting though a tripod is what I've gotten my best shots with.
 
Thanks. I did pretty much what you guys said. I used a tripod, ISO 100, tried some different apertures between f4 to f8 depending on how much depth there was that needed to stay in focus. I left it in A priority and it auto adjusted my shutter speed to around 1 to 3 seconds for most shots, depending on where I had the aperture set. I feel like an idiot for getting it totally wrong the first time and having to drive all the way back. Hopefully these will look better than the other ones when I upload them to my pc.
 
I don't know what camera you have, but here is my $.0.2.
If you have DSLR you could use mirror lockup and a 2 second delay on a tripod as has been mentioned above. I sometimes like to not have my tripod, as I have more flexibility in my shots, and can move quicker. If your camera can handle a higher ISO without a lot of grain, then you can ditch the tripod if you wish. Use a higher ISO (I have found I can get a great shot up to ISO 600), shoot at f8, as you will get more detail and a sharper image. And shoot in RAW.
 
gnwatts said:
I don't know what camera you have, but here is my $.0.2.
If you have DSLR you could use mirror lockup and a 2 second delay on a tripod as has been mentioned above. I sometimes like to not have my tripod, as I have more flexibility in my shots, and can move quicker. If your camera can handle a higher ISO without a lot of grain, then you can ditch the tripod if you wish. Use a higher ISO (I have found I can get a great shot up to ISO 600), shoot at f8, as you will get more detail and a sharper image. And shoot in RAW.
Click to expand...

Don't listen VH. Greg uses full frames! :roflmao:

Us crop sensor folk can't shoot higher ISO as much.
 
Thanks Greg. I have an a6000 mirrorless. Somewhat of a toy camera compared to the pro stuff that guys like you have on here.
slc_dan said:
Don't listen VH. Greg uses full frames! :roflmao:
Us crop sensor folk can't shoot higher ISO as much.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I kept the ISO at 100 all day. I posted a few from today in the Non-Backcountry album... http://backcountrypost.com/threads/non-backcountry-photos.5418/page-2#post-66328

Shots didn't come out great, but they were an improvement over my attempt last week, so that's progress at least.
 
VH, if noise is a problem you might take a look at DXO Optics Pro

I am currently using V9 and have been using it for years since V3. I think they are up to V10 now. It not only does some very nice lens corrections but the Noise engine is phenomenal. They do support your A6000 for full RAW processing and had more features than PS a long while back. PS has sort of caught up but still not the same. The noise engine in DXO blows away PS. I still import 16 bit Tiff files into PS after I process the RAW in DXO for micro contrast adjustments but even at ISO 1600 on my old Canon 20D and Canon Xti (which I bought used at a fraction of the original price) there is no visible noise and absolutely no loss of detail. It does not smear the details like other noise filters do. I also get much better overall detail out of DXO. But for some images I do like the look of PS RAW too. The high ISO, well, DXO is unbeatable...

But the FF guys definitely got the mojo going. The latitude they enjoy is really something. They could probably shoot extreme ISO hand held all night long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top