Digital cameras: Unsure of camera choice for indoor action shots
Unsure of camera choice for indoor action shots
by Cheermom - 11/9/06 8:43 PMCurrently I am using a Panasonic FZ20; however, action shots seem to be getting worse and worse due to low lighting. If the lighting is moderate to good, I am fine-but the slightest bit of low light and I have to drop my shutter speed down so far that the pictures are often blurred. I have tried to lower the ISO to at least 200-but that for some reason makes the pictures darker?! So I usually shot at ISO 400 and can not get above shutter speed of 1/ 125 even in the best of indoor lighting, and at low lighting usually 1/80. My pictures are turning out with quite a bit of noise that only blurs when I try to correct with noise software. I would love to know how to fix this and have tried suggestions offerred on this board when I posted a long time ago. At this point I am willing to get a new camera-but cannot afford a digital SLR because I really need the 12X optical zoom-and a lense for the SLR to get that will be way more than the camera. Can anyone offer any suggestions on how to fix the problem-or a better choice of camera for this situation??? Thank you in advance...
Low Light Conditions
by snapshot2
- 11/10/06 2:45 PM
In reply to: Unsure of camera choice for indoor action shots by Cheermom
You have been doing everything that you can do.
The lighting conditions are just too low for your camera.
Here is how to set your camera for its maximum light collection:
Set the camera to Manual Mode.
Set the flash to off
Set ISO to 400
Set Aperture to 2.8
Set shutter speed to 1/250th of a second
Take a photo under your low light conditions.
If the photo turns out dark, your only choice is to lower the shutter speed.
Set the shutter speed to 1/125th of a second.
Take a photo, and if it turns out dark, your only choice is to lower the shutter speed.
etc. etc.
If you lower the ISO to 200 to prevent so much noise, you will have to cut your shutter speed in half to compensate.
..................
Why a DSLR camera can operate better in low light is because it has ISO settings that can go as high as 1600 and 3200, with low noise.
...
..
.
Any sugestions?
by Cheermom - 11/10/06 7:23 PM In reply to: Low Light Conditions by snapshot2
Thanks Snapsot-I do believe it was you that helped me out the first time around! Are there any suggestions for a camera better suited? I was reading around the new Leica V-LUX 1-would it be any better in low light? I would love the Cannon Rebel-but to get the lense would cost a fortune!
Suggestions
by snapshot2 - 11/11/06 8:06 AM
In reply to: Any sugestions? by Cheermom
The problem with all of the non DSLR cameras is the CCD sensor is too noisy.
According to the reviewers, the Panasonic CCDs are nosier than the others.
Fujifilm has the best low noise CCDs
According to the specifications, the Fujifilm S5200, S9000 and S9100 should perform better in low light than the Panasonic FZ20.
I would guess, they would have about three f-stops advantage.
But I have no way to test that.
Also... those cameras are 10X zoom and do not have image stabilization.
If you could get a camera store to let you try one, that would let you know if it works satisfactorily for your situation.
Also the Sony R1, should do better than the Panasonic FZ20, but it costs about $950 and is only 5X zoom.
.............
A DSLR would be the best choice, but you still have to choose a "bright" lens (at least F2.8). A F2.8 long zoom with image stabilization would set you back about $1,500.
If you can get closer to the action, a DSLR with a 50mm f1.8 lens would be perfect. And that lens sells for under $100. I have seen some basketball shots with that lens (gym lighting), apparently from the lowest bleacher seating near the basket (and no flash). They were excellent. Remember a Canon Rebel DSLR camera will see the 50mm lens as being 80mm. And a Nikon D50/80 DSLR camera will see the 50mm lens as being 75mm. That 50mm f1.8 lens is also perfect for portraits.
As far as the Leica V-LUS 1, I don't know.
If it has a Panasonic (Matsushita) CCD, I doubt it would be any better.
...
..
.
Canon Rebel?
by Cheermom - 11/16/06 9:00 PM In reply to: Suggestions by snapshot2
Well-I may be purchasing the new Canon Rebel-not sure if I should go with the one that just came out-or the 350. They are $100 apart in price-and the larger LCD is very nice on he newer one. Anyone have experience with these two that can suggest which one would be best? Thanks!
I would go for the newest one. The Xti.
by Kiddpeat - 11/16/06 9:11 PM In reply to: Canon Rebel? by CheermomI think the larger sensor is worth it.
DMC-FZ20 has limits so
by mrobzo - 11/13/06 2:13 PM In reply to: Unsure of camera choice for indoor action shots by CheermomWhen I used to have one, low light shooting problems become apparent right off the bat. It does have a good built in flash however I reccomend attaching one to the available shoe. It is a fairly universal shoe. I use an old one that I had for a Canon AE-1. If you don't want a direct flash, you can use some aluminum foil to deflect the light in another direction and crank down the iso on the flash unit. You can also get a remote shoe attachment to move the flash unit to another angle so it isn't so direct and point it away from the subject. This way you won't have to worry about having to use the high iso on the camera and the noise will not be such a problem.
Use the SLR's strength- changeable lenses
by Mgradyc - 11/13/06 7:21 PM In reply to: Unsure of camera choice for indoor action shots by CheermomI think an SLR is what it will take to get the performance you want. Remember,you don't have to have just one lens that can take every picture you want. A two or three lens combination of wide, medium, and telephoto lenses will not set you back near as much as a single high performance lens with 12X zoom, and each will be faster (larger aperture) without having to use exotic (expensive) materials. As a rule, fixed focus or short zoom lenses are much faster and significantly cheaper than longer zooms. And the wider the zoom range, the higher the price (mainly of the materials from which the elements of the lens are made) to coax the same amount of light through the increasing number of lens elements needed to keep the lens a manageable size. The other factor giving the SLR a distinct advantage is sensor size. The sensors in DSLR's tend to be quite a bit larger than those in SuperZooms, so more of the light coming through the lens is usable. Think of it this way. If you have two solar panels on the roof of your house and one is 1' x 1' (1 sq ft) and the other is 2' x 2' (4 sq ft) and both use the same materials and design and are the same angle to the sun, which one will collect more energy from the sun? How much more would you have to spend on exotic materials and higher technology to get a 1' x 1' panel to output the same amount of energy as the 2' x 2'?
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
