snubbr.com

good camera for taking pictures in low light without the flash
Hi.

Im new to the board and was hoping someone could recommend a good camera for taking pictures in the dark without using the flash. I take a lot of photos at gigs and some no flashes are allowed and with using my current camera, a kodak z740 the photos all come out very blurry as the subject is moving.Also if I can use the flash any lights, lasers etc are muted and dull looking! this also happens when taking photos of neon lights, fireworks and any lit up areas outside at night! I have tried using differeny settings on my camera to no avail - including using the firework setting!! ThanksKelly..

Comments (13)

Consider a DSLR. Even the cheapest will perform much better than best of consumer P&S cameras. DSLRs have 10-15 times larger pixels than similar resolution P&S camera so more sensitive to light. Nikon D40 with a fast prime lens should be the way to go. However you can start off with kit lens (Total Cost - $500 approx.).DSLRs are as easy to use as any of P&S camera so don't get intimidated by them..

If you want a compact only, then Canon SD950, A570IS, A720IS. (all have optical viewfinder).

Kel1979 wrote:.

HiIm new to the board and was hoping someone could recommend a goodcamera for taking pictures in the dark without using the flash. Itake a lot of photos at gigs and some no flashes are allowed and withusing my current camera, a kodak z740 the photos all come out veryblurry as the subject is moving.Also if I can use the flash anylights, lasers etc are muted and dull looking! this also happens whentaking photos of neon lights, fireworks and any lit up areas outsideat night! I have tried using differeny settings on my camera to noavail - including using the firework setting!! ThanksKelly.

Best Wishes, Ajayhttp://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612..

Comment #1

A few basic photography facts are good to keep in mind when shooting in a dark area such as a nightclub. As well as going for a DSLR such as a Nikon D40 or other camera (larger pixels will receive more light), the amount of light reaching the sensor depends on the size of aperture opening of the lens as well. So a lens that is good at low light imaging is important as well. A 30mm f/2 is a good lens at a reasonable price. Or a 50mm f/1.8. Shooting in low light also requires a steady hand so as to avoid camera blur. Of the non-DSLRs, Fuji f30 or f31 is the best at low light.Will..

Comment #2

Kel1979 wrote:.

HiIm new to the board and was hoping someone could recommend a goodcamera for taking pictures in the dark without using the flash. Itake a lot of photos at gigs and some no flashes are allowed and withusing my current camera, a kodak z740 the photos all come out veryblurry as the subject is moving.Also if I can use the flash anylights, lasers etc are muted and dull looking! this also happens whentaking photos of neon lights, fireworks and any lit up areas outsideat night! I have tried using differeny settings on my camera to noavail - including using the firework setting!! ThanksKelly.

Pentax K100D and either the FA35 f/2.0 or the DA40 f/2.8 Limited lens with it..

For approx $500 you get an inexpensive, solid but compact digital-SLR with good ergonomics and shake-reduction built-in and good low-light/high-ISO noise characterics, a well-made, compact good-general-photography lens with a fast maximum aperture..

I routinely take ISO 800 (very clean) and ISO 1600 (almost always usable even without later noise-reduction), hand-held at slow shutter speeds indoors and have no problems getting the shot..

-Now, if you need a zoom lens, that's tougher, because you'd have to pay more, regardless of which brand, to get a zoom that "fast". But if you can move in & out, and your pics are usually at around a "normal" focal length (not real wide-angle nor telephoto) the above is the way to go inexpensively...

Comment #3

You're asking allot from a camera ... what is your price range ... for camera & lens? DSLR's especially the new generation of both Canon and Nikon ... The better the low-light handling the more you are looking to spend ... Canon 40D or Nikon D300 and a good mid-zoom lens that is "fast" f2.8 would be good but no slower then f4 or so.Richard Herbert, Monterey CAStandout from conformity, 'Only a dead fish swims with the current.'..

Comment #4

You must have a DSLR, and a lens with an Fstop of 2.8 or lower 1.8,1.4 1.2 would be better but these are primes (fixed focal length) and would not be as versatile as a short zoom.Which brand and how much you spend is now the vexed question..

If you are on a limited budget then you cannot beat the Pentax K100D with a 16-50 f2.8 next step would be the K10D with same lens, slightly faster focus, more megapixel 10 versus 6 which enables you to crop more and still retain a good image.and Anti Shake Built into the CameraNext level up would be Canon 40D or Nikon D200.

For Canon choose EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8 You Need the IS (image Stabalised) for hand held shots in low light..

For Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 IF ED Unfortunatley Nikon do not produce a VR (Vibration Reduction) Lens at this focal length and the 18-200 VR is too slow (smaller aperture) and image quality hardly up to tha mark for what you want.So there you arePentax K100D with DA*16-50 f2.8Pentax K10D with DA*16-50 f2.8Canon 40D with EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8Nikon D200 with AF-S Nikkor f2.8 IF EDPrice them up and see where they fit your budget..

Dont for one minute think that this is where it stops, as you get more involved and better at it you will want more lenses, Monopods, Vertical grips, and so on.But any of these suggestions would be a very good start point.Best of luck with your deliberations..

Comment #5

Ajay0612 wrote:.

Nikon D40 with a fast prime lens should be the way to go..

Other than the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, there is no wide to mild telephoto prime lens that will autofocus on the D40. If you want inexpensive, good low light, and autofocus, the D40 only hits on 2 of 3..

Pentax K100D or Canon 350D or 400D would be better choices..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #6

Solo1 wrote:.

You must have a DSLR, and a lens with an Fstop of 2.8 or lower1.8,1.4 1.2 would be better but these are primes (fixed focal length)and would not be as versatile as a short zoom.Which brand and how much you spend is now the vexed question.If you are on a limited budget then you cannot beat the Pentax K100Dwith a 16-50 f2.8 next step would be the K10D with same lens,slightly faster focus, more megapixel 10 versus 6 which enables youto crop more and still retain a good image.and Anti Shake Built intothe CameraNext level up would be Canon 40D or Nikon D200For Canon choose EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8 You Need the IS (imageStabalised) for hand held shots in low light.For Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 IF ED Unfortunatley Nikon do notproduce a VR (Vibration Reduction) Lens at this focal length and the18-200 VR is too slow (smaller aperture) and image quality hardly upto tha mark for what you want.So there you arePentax K100D with DA*16-50 f2.8Pentax K10D with DA*16-50 f2.8Canon 40D with EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8Nikon D200 with AF-S Nikkor f2.8 IF EDPrice them up and see where they fit your budget.Dont for one minute think that this is where it stops, as you getmore involved and better at it you will want more lenses, Monopods,Vertical grips, and so on.But any of these suggestions would be avery good start point.Best of luck with your deliberations.

Hi.

As far as cameras overall I think you are pretty well right but for low light I think the K100d is a BETTER choice than either the K10d or The D200 and about level with the Canon 40d....Of course it is not the camera those others are, but purely in terms of decent high iso performance with useable 3200 it is greatThis means with the K100d you CAN use slower lenses than 2.8 from time to time with some reasonable relults..

Of course if you do you will not always get as good results....this is also why The Nikon D3 would be SOOOOOO good for this sort of thing....iso 6400 or even 12800 and a 5.6 lens ...no problem..

Ok it's not a great photo (but I like it) and it was used for a while on the entrance page to Grinspoons photo galleries until they shut the site down for a while..

Iso 3200 at f3 .5 (5.6 with a D3 would have made my day) 1/45 34mm from 2006 with a Pentax IST*D ....I prefer my K100d now simply because of the larger lcd and the antishake...though I will not part with the IST*D..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

With a DSLR though you will mostly need to get a photo pass before hand as you can not shoot at 2.8 if your camera is sitting in a cloakroom..

It IS worth it though...if you like it and do good work, it can save you a fortune in admission fees...and if good enough may get you some money..

Neil.

Link back to flickrhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/26884588@N00/..

Comment #7

Ajay0612 wrote:.

DSLRs have 10-15 times larger pixels thansimilar resolution P&S camera so more sensitive to light..

That much?..

Comment #8

William Carson wrote:.

(larger pixels will receive more light),....

But that light is scattered over larger area, so it has less intensity.....

Comment #9

Peter 13 wrote:.

William Carson wrote:.

(larger pixels will receive more light),....

But that light is scattered over larger area, so it has lessintensity....

At the same f-stop, the intensity is the same..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #10

Nickleback wrote:.

Peter 13 wrote:.

William Carson wrote:.

(larger pixels will receive more light),....

But that light is scattered over larger area, so it has lessintensity....

At the same f-stop, the intensity is the same..

Yes, you are right. On the other hand, we can think of a large sensor as a few smaller ones connected together in a parallel way, exposed to light with the same intensity, as in a PS camera. That does not make the larger sensor more sensitive, juts averages the errors/noise, and this is exacty what we need...

Comment #11

Peter 13 wrote:.

Nickleback wrote:.

Peter 13 wrote:.

William Carson wrote:.

(larger pixels will receive more light),....

But that light is scattered over larger area, so it has lessintensity....

At the same f-stop, the intensity is the same..

Yes, you are right..

OK..

On the other hand, we can think of a large sensoras a few smaller ones connected together in a parallel way, exposedto light with the same intensity, as in a PS camera. That does notmake the larger sensor more sensitive, juts averages theerrors/noise, and this is exacty what we need..

Nobody, except you, said "more sensitive". What the poster you responded to did say is that larger pixels receive more light. Which, all other things being equal, is true. And as you say, it's exactly what is needed in this situation..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Comment #12

Nickleback wrote:.

Peter 13 wrote:.

Nickleback wrote:.

Peter 13 wrote:.

William Carson wrote:.

(larger pixels will receive more light),....

But that light is scattered over larger area, so it has lessintensity....

At the same f-stop, the intensity is the same..

Yes, you are right..

OK..

On the other hand, we can think of a large sensoras a few smaller ones connected together in a parallel way, exposedto light with the same intensity, as in a PS camera. That does notmake the larger sensor more sensitive, juts averages theerrors/noise, and this is exacty what we need..

Nobody, except you, said "more sensitive". What the poster youresponded to did say is that larger pixels receive more light.Which, all other things being equal, is true. And as you say, it'sexactly what is needed in this situation..

Nobody, including myself, said that somebody else said "more sensitive"...

Comment #13

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.