ISO - low light question

[twoatsea]

I'm looking for a camera that does better in low light than my current one, which basically does not accept low light! However, I want to stay with a point & shoot & not too complicated - I'm strickly an avid traveler who wants good photos, not a photographer, & want to remain so.

 

At Best Buy today, the salesperson told me that the higher the ISO, the better in low light. First of all, is that correct?

 

If so, then how high ISO should I look for?

 

What is sacrificed if go to a high ISO, if anything - storage space, high resolution for my photos when enlarged, .....?

 

Anyone have any such cameras to offer for me to research?

 

Thanks in advance

[pierces]

I'm looking for a camera that does better in low light than my current one, which basically does not accept low light! However, I want to stay with a point & shoot & not too complicated - I'm strickly an avid traveler who wants good photos, not a photographer, & want to remain so.

 

At Best Buy today, the salesperson told me that the higher the ISO, the better in low light. First of all, is that correct?

 

If so, then how high ISO should I look for?

 

What is sacrificed if go to a high ISO, if anything - storage space, high resolution for my photos when enlarged, .....?

 

Anyone have any such cameras to offer for me to research?

 

Thanks in advance

 

 

High ISO related to the light sensitivity like it used to with film. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive to light. There is, however, the same "something for nothing" rule. (Remember grainy ISO1600 film?) Point and shoot cameras use relatively tiny sensors with even tinier photosites (each pixel is a photosite) and therefore gives up sensitivity for the compact size. A few do pretty well in low light, but the best point & shoot doesn't do high ISO as well as the worst DSLR. That said, you can get acceptable 5x7 prints at ISO 800 or eben 1600 from a few models, like the Panasonic DMC-TZ5 or the Fuji F100d.

 

If you find a camera that interests you, post with the specific model and you will probably find someone who has one or someone with knowledge of the model.

 

Dave

[twoatsea]

Dave, my objective is to able to take some nite photos & low light inside photos, for instance at nite of a ship, building, etc. all lit up. Fireworks. Ahhh, the Rialto Bridge at nite! Inside a dimly lit basilica. However, I don't want to carry around the bulky add-on lenses; prefer a point & shoot.

 

For the last several years I've used a Fuji FinePix A345 digital. Rather than buying a new one is this one capable, but I just don't know how? Or do I need to go to something like the Canon SD870 IS that you discussed on another thread?

 

Also, I read on another thread that you discussed holding still for so many seconds to get a good low light photo. How does one know how many seconds to hold their breath - don't want to overdo it! :eek: And what camera settings would I need to know about that would work on my current Fuji or on a new 870 if my current one just won't cut it? Also saw that you or someone mentioned holding the "button" for so many seconds - again how many seconds?

 

Thanks, Julie

[twoatsea]

I should also add that I enlarge some of my photos to 18x22. So far haven't gone beyond that. My current camera does very well in maintaining the quality, but it is set for the best resolution possible.

 

I did find an unhappy camper with the 870 on dpreview - here's what he said - don't know if you have heard of such problems with that camera -

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_sd870is&opinion=40187

 

Also found this review on dp & have no idea what it means!!!???

Problems

The main reason I am upgrading is because my old SD800is has hot pixel on sensor. BUT the new SD870is has hot pixel too!!! And I exchanged it 4 times!! That's a total of 5 units of SD870is that have varies amount of hot pixels. I returned mine.

 

If you think yours don't have hot pixel, take a picture at ISO100 without flash in complete darkness(ie: covering the lens with your hand), and then examine the picture in 100%. I am convinced that every SD870is has hot pixels

[PeterPan]

DPreview is a good site. However, it is full of "pixel peepers" that examine everything down to the tiniest detail. They are more concerned with the technology than the photograph. Just look at the number of 100% crops that people post over there with "problems". How often do you look at your photos at that size?

 

I would suggest looking at some pictures taken by the camera model(s) you are looking at and deciding for yourself.

 

I'll let Dave comment on the capabilities of your current camera, as I don't own one and know little or nothing about it :o

[zackiedawg]

Dave, my objective is to able to take some nite photos & low light inside photos, for instance at nite of a ship, building, etc. all lit up. Fireworks. Ahhh, the Rialto Bridge at nite! Inside a dimly lit basilica. However, I don't want to carry around the bulky add-on lenses; prefer a point & shoot.

 

For the last several years I've used a Fuji FinePix A345 digital. Rather than buying a new one is this one capable, but I just don't know how? Or do I need to go to something like the Canon SD870 IS that you discussed on another thread?

 

Also, I read on another thread that you discussed holding still for so many seconds to get a good low light photo. How does one know how many seconds to hold their breath - don't want to overdo it! :eek: And what camera settings would I need to know about that would work on my current Fuji or on a new 870 if my current one just won't cut it? Also saw that you or someone mentioned holding the "button" for so many seconds - again how many seconds?

 

Thanks, Julie

 

Julie,

 

As Dave mentioned, higher ISO does indeed allow greater sensitivity for low light, but at the expense of both noise (graininess) and smearing (many cameras have noise reduction algorithms which attempt to remove the noise from high ISO shots, but the result is usually loss of quite a bit of detail too!). That doesn't mean you can't use it - just know and accept the limitations...I've actually shot at ISO800 with a P&S and gotten 8x10 results that were pretty decent and gotten good comments - if you really look close, sure, it's got noise lurking in the dark spots, but it captured a moment I otherwise couldn't have shot.

 

The other method as you mention is to go with a slower shutter speed and keep your ISO low. If you let the camera shoot for 3, 5, or 10 seconds, it will absorb enough light over that time to properly expose a night scene - the downside is that any form of movement on either your part or the subject's part will result in blur...everything must remain perfectly still - which usually means putting the camera down on a level surface or on a tripod and letting the self-timer snap the pic. You'll get by far the nicest, cleanest results using this method, but only when conditions are right and things are still.

 

As for a rule of thumb for how long to let the shutter stay open? Well, the easiest way to do it is to set your P&S camera to the 'night scene' mode - all cameras have one, usually denoted by an icon of a moon or something similar - and let the camera decide on it's own how long to expose. You'll get passable results most of the time this way, if you're not a camera enthusiast. Once you get a little confidence, you can start setting your own shutter speed. No single rule-of-thumb is perfect - most of us, even long-time veterans, will shoot at an educated guess, then adjust if need be for the second shot. If the scene is too dark, add a second or two more shutter speed. If the lights are all blown out and white, back off a bit.

 

As for cameras capable of shooting decent high ISO in the P&S arena - none are great, but some that seemt o have passable results are the Fuji F100FS & S100, the Sony H50 and W300, and the Canon S5 IS. I'm sure there are others...but those ones I've at least browsed test results for and they seem to be at least usable for decent prints even at ISO800 or so. The S100, H50, and S5 are slightly more bulky cameras, with larger bodies and more square shapes with large zoom lenses...the F100 & W300 are slim pocket-cams with less zoom range, but more portability. They both claim to go up to 3200 or so...but really are at least fairly usable to 800 with a barely passable ISO1600 if you really need to try to get the shot. ISO3200 is just for marketing - no P&S has much usability at that range or higher.

 

Hope that helps!

[Aplmac]

I don't get into the technology stuff much but..for what it's worth

I have a little Canon Powershot A630 point-and-shoot

which I use with a tripod to get some fairly nice night and twilight shots.

 

I simply set the control wheel at Night Mode and shoot away!

I can tell approx. how long the exposures are

by listening for the 'shutter sound' after I've pressed the trigger the whole way down

and it's often 1 sec. or more.

 

On site viewing via the playback screen usually isn't too impressive

but I've learned to ignore that and wait til I get back home to the computer

before making any final judgement call

and I'm usually pleasantly surprised by what I've captured!!

 

Here are a few examples -taken with a tripod

(that makes a whole lotta difference, eh?)

 

______________________________________________

 

 

__________________________________________________

 

 

____________________________________________________

 

 

__________________________________________________________

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________

[pierces]

Dave, my objective is to able to take some nite photos & low light inside photos, for instance at nite of a ship, building, etc. all lit up. Fireworks. Ahhh, the Rialto Bridge at nite! Inside a dimly lit basilica. However, I don't want to carry around the bulky add-on lenses; prefer a point & shoot.

 

For the last several years I've used a Fuji FinePix A345 digital. Rather than buying a new one is this one capable, but I just don't know how? Or do I need to go to something like the Canon SD870 IS that you discussed on another thread?

 

Also, I read on another thread that you discussed holding still for so many seconds to get a good low light photo. How does one know how many seconds to hold their breath - don't want to overdo it! :eek: And what camera settings would I need to know about that would work on my current Fuji or on a new 870 if my current one just won't cut it? Also saw that you or someone mentioned holding the "button" for so many seconds - again how many seconds?

 

Thanks, Julie

 

Alas, your quest for good pictures without becoming a photographer is like wanting to running a marathon without all that nasty training. You can get decent low-light shots out of your current camera, but you will have to learn a little about it. Look at your manual and find out how to lock your ISO to a specific setting so it won't automatically adjust it to a higher sensitivity an introduce a lot of noise (I think your camera only has 64 or 400 ISO as a choice). Get a small travel tripod ($10-15 and real simple) so you can take long exposures.

 

The following were taken with my SD800 under various bad lighting conditions:

Leaving San Jose - braced against the window frame - 1s exposure at ISO100:

 

1/8s at iso100 - Really dim lounge:

 

.6s ISO100 - sitting on the edge of a table using the self timer so I wouldn't jiggle it.

 

All of these were shot with the camera on auto except for turning off the flash and locking the ISO. A pocket camera is a great tool, but you need to practice with it.

 

You should join in on the CCPICS threads. Were going to be covering a lot of these types of challenges in future self assignments.

 

Dave

[Aplmac]

The following were taken with my SD800 under various bad lighting conditions:

Leaving San Jose - braced against the window frame - 1s exposure at ISO100:

 

1/8s at iso100 - Really dim lounge:

 

 

All of these were shot with the camera on auto except for turning off the flash and locking the ISO.

Dave

Like the lighting in that middle shot!

[twoatsea]

Thanks so much everyone for taking the time to try & train me! :eek: Thanks for the pictures. I like the comparison to a marathon runner - so true!

 

My camera is actually my adult son's camera that I have been taking on our travels. I don't have a manual; neither does he. He went online & copied one for me.........but he left out some pages! :p So, I have done some reading today along with the camera in hand, hope to get it all read soon, hopefully with the missing pages!. As suggested, I think this is the best route for me - study my current camera's manual, study my current camera, experiment with my current camera off of auto, lurk on your guys posts & learn a lot. Then I can consider whether I want to move up to another camera.....at which time I will probably be back here bugging you folks!

 

I hadn't taken photos in probably 20 years & started using my son's camera on trips in '06. Now I am really enjoying & have been lucky with a few great shots. I think I may really get into this photography thing! :cool:

 

Thanks again, Julie

[snowbird1]

Looks like everyone has covered this well. Basically you can get away with the lower ISO IF you have something to stablize the camera and do a timed exposer without shaking the camera. If the item to take a picture of is moving then, a faster ISO or flash is probably the way to go. As Dave told you, once you get to the higher ISO's it isn't likely that you will be able to enlarge a picture too much without it looking really bad. Some of the new DSLR's you can really crank the ISO up and get pretty good results but you didn't want that. Once you get the DSLR's then the speed of the lens is also an important factor.

[sparky-elpaso]

One nice thing about digital is you can practice and shoot a lot of pics and it doesn't cost you a cent. If it didn't work just hit that delete key on your computer.

[Aplmac]

One nice thing about digital is you can practice and shoot a lot of pics and it doesn't cost you a cent.

Yes, agreed about the deletion factor

(not to mention no disgusting chemicals being used to process film-strips and prints!)

 

..but what I find amazing about digital is how well these new processors capture low light levels!

When I think back to how we used to expose Koday Tri-X (ASA 400) at ASA 1200

and then use Acufine developer, to get (grainy) results

I realize how the light-capturing technology has come a long long way my friends!