Support NeoGAF

[olimario]

I'm looking to sell my current 5 megapixel digital camera soon and move to something with much better quality. I was wondering if somebody could field some questions of mine...

1) Why do some pictures turn out grainy? The grainy pictures are always in dim light, it seems. Why is that? Is there a digital camera that doesn't have this problem?

2) When I look outside at night I can see the color in the sky and the outline of the trees, but any picture I take comes out completely black. Is there a digital camera out there that will reproduce what I see as I see it?

3) I've been taking sports pictures, but there always seems to be a blurred arm or a blurred leg in there. What shutter speed will capture a pitchers arm or a hockey players stick?


Thanks, GAF tech and photography pros.

 

[Ill Saint]

Making this quick, sorry. Someone will no doubt go into more detail...

1) Why do some pictures turn out grainy? The grainy pictures are always in dim light, it seems. Why is that? Is there a digital camera that doesn't have this problem?

-- Low light will do that.

2) When I look outside at night I can see the color in the sky and the outline of the trees, but any picture I take comes out completely black. Is there a digital camera out there that will reproduce what I see as I see it?

-- Long exposure. Sit down with a tripod and expose over a long period (10-20, 30 seconds etc... whatever amount is necessary depending on available light. Experiment).

3) I've been taking sports pictures, but there always seems to be a blurred arm or a blurred leg in there. What shutter speed will capture a pitchers arm or a hockey players stick?

-- Set your camera to a faster shutter speed.

 

[nitewulf]

I'm looking to sell my current 5 megapixel digital camera soon and move to something with much better quality. I was wondering if somebody could field some questions of mine...

1) Why do some pictures turn out grainy? The grainy pictures are always in dim light, it seems. Why is that? Is there a digital camera that doesn't have this problem?

2) When I look outside at night I can see the color in the sky and the outline of the trees, but any picture I take comes out completely black. Is there a digital camera out there that will reproduce what I see as I see it?

3) I've been taking sports pictures, but there always seems to be a blurred arm or a blurred leg in there. What shutter speed will capture a pitchers arm or a hockey players stick?


Thanks, GAF tech and photography pros.

1)the more the ISO, the more the noise. to keep noise levels lower, take shots at lower ISO settings. if you buy an interchangeable lens SLR like the digital rebel, you'll get less noise at higher ISO comparatively. its becase the CCD chip used in bigger cameras are physically larger, therefor the interference from the phototransistors are reduced, in effect reducing "noise" or grain.
in dim light, the noise just becomes more apparent.

2)just use a slower shutter speed. i took some night shots at 8 seconds and higher with my G5, but you MUST use a tripod.
also, Digi cams by default will not reproduce "what" you see, you'll have to adjust the color at times. the auto white balance works well for most situations, but will show discrepencies at times. color balancing is a big issue with digital photography. its not a problem with film cameras.

3) anything around 1/200 and upwards should do the trick, at good light. but remember, with regular digi cams you have to pre set the shot, sort of. they are not as fast as film or DSLRs. so you have to do a manual focus beforehand, anticipate the shot you're going to take, and press the shutter a split second before. those are good pointer for taking action shots. i also use the burst mode in my G5 and it works quite well. good thing is, you can see if you like the exposure or not and change accordingly.

 

[Outlaw Pro Mod]

1. See Ill Saint's response. Although some pictures will produce less grain than others (don't have examples but I recall reading this in some reviews). Lowering the ISO speed could eliminate some of the grain.

2. Yep, longer exposure. Although, if you're taking a pic of a pitch black sky - just stars - you'll probably want to have a camera that can at least go to a 16 second exposure. Full blown manual would be the way to go though.

3. One thing you could try (if you haven't already) is to look at your subject and press the shutter button down halfway. This will go ahead and set the autofocus allowing for a quick snap. Or better yet, if your camera has what is called continuous shooting / burst mode...you can use that. This will take a series of pictures in milliseconds.

 

[nitewulf]

some night shots i took:

action shots:

burst mode, fish kept swimming.

 

[olimario]

Thanks for all the help.
What digitial camera do you all suggest if I want to reduce these problems as much as possible?

And how do I know if I have burst mode on my camera?

 

[nitewulf]

check the manual for a continuous shooting mode. also you can use programs like "neat image" to reduce the noise, it works really well.
your problem #2 isnt a camera issue, its a shutter speed issue.
#1 will be improved by getting a big camera like the Nikon D70, Canon 300D/10D/20D...any of the popular interchangeable lens SLRs basically.
#3....move onto film for best results, or get a digital camera with a high framerate, ie high speed burst mode.

 

[Outlaw Pro Mod]

There's a good rebate offer currently going on for the Canon Digital Rebel. I'm highly considering getting this camera.

 

[maharg]

There's a good rebate offer currently going on for the Canon Digital Rebel. I'm highly considering getting this camera.

A manufacturer rebate, or is this at some particular store?

I heard something about it having fuzzyness at the edge of the picture.

 

[btrboyev]

i doubt you need to get a new camera oli, you just need to know what your doing.

 

[olimario]

i doubt you need to get a new camera oli, you just need to know what your doing.

I learn more every time I sit down with it and every time I talk to my friend Emily who has the exact same camera.

 

[SickBoy]

What camera do you have?

 

[BugCatcher]

I learn more every time I sit down with it and every time I talk to my friend Emily who has the exact same camera.

Imagine how much you would learn if you would just read the manual! The ISO setting, aperture and shutter speed are all basic manual controls that you should know how to use. Your camera costs almost $700, so it's a real waste of its potential and your money if you won't spend an hour or two to learn how to operate it.

 

[olimario]

Imagine how much you would learn if you would just read the manual! The ISO setting, aperture and shutter speed are all basic manual controls that you should know how to use. Your camera costs almost $700, so it's a real waste of its potential and your money if you won't spend an hour or two to learn how to operate it.

I talk to Emily because she knows the manual inside and out and she can show me how to do the things I want to do. You're right though, I should sit down with it again sometime.
I got my camera for 550ish.

 

[nitewulf]

your camera is a really good one, was my first choice (the sony dsc F717 correct?). you really should get your hands wet with this one and in fact keep it. and buy a DSLR when you know you are proficient.
big SLRS cant be easily carried everywhere you know (mountain biking, hiking), not to mention if you are serious you'll need a kit with extra lenses and whatnot which you'll have to carry as well.
sometimes its good to have a nice fixed lens camera to tag along hassle free, and 5MP is more than enough for most purposes.
its really not the camera, whatever limitations a camera may have, a good photographer will get around those. i have seen ppl take stunning shots with G1s and G2s.

 

[olimario]

I took this awhile back using my laundry hamper as a tripod.
I guess I just need to play with exposure a bit more.
This is a night shot.

And another freehand during a lightning storm.

 

[XMonkey]

If you really want to get rid of the graininess, go with a DSLR. The bigger sensor size (not megapixels, but physical size) makes a world of difference. I use a Digitel Rebel and I love it. It's extremely fast compared to my old digital camera (a point and shoot Nikon) and being able to change lenses makes it versatile also. Highly recommend it.

 

[BugCatcher]

nitewulf, thanks for the tip about Neat Image! It only took a few minutes to filter this shot, and I'm really impressed how well it worked:

I've only got a 4MP camera (appropriate, I guess, for a hobbyist at my level), so although I still try to get the best quality when I'm shooting, I need to rely a bit more on post processing than you guys with your nice SLRs. This program is really handy, thanks again!

 

[aoi tsuki]

I took this awhile back using my laundry hamper as a tripod.
I guess I just need to play with exposure a bit more.
This is a night shot.

And another freehand during a lightning storm.

i'd also see if there's a way to delay your camera from taking shots the moment you fully depress the shutter. On my Canon S40 it's called "Drive Mode" in the options. i can add a two or ten second delay. It's useful because if your camera isn't mounted on a tripod, it's very easy to shake the camera when you hit the shutter button. When using a long exposure, this can make the difference between a fairly clear and a blurry shot.

 

[nitewulf]

And another freehand during a lightning storm.

yep, all you gotta do is buy a tripod. with a tripod, this shot would have come out very nice!

If you really want to get rid of the graininess, go with a DSLR. The bigger sensor size (not megapixels, but physical size) makes a world of difference. I use a Digitel Rebel and I love it. It's extremely fast compared to my old digital camera (a point and shoot Nikon) and being able to change lenses makes it versatile also. Highly recommend it.

there is no doubt the DSLRs are higher quality cameras and will take pictures faster. but its just my opinion that YOU take the pictures, the camera is just a tool. and you should learn how to use whatever tool you got well. automatically buying the best gadget right off the bat might not yield the best results. then you'll wonder if you bought the wrong camera again!
and sometimes i preffer a bit of grain with pictures, specially black and white, it adds character/texture.

if this picture came out clean, i wouldnt have liked it as much.

nitewulf, thanks for the tip about Neat Image! It only took a few minutes to filter this shot, and I'm really impressed how well it worked:

no problem, it really does work quite well.

I've only got a 4MP camera (appropriate, I guess, for a hobbyist at my level), so although I still try to get the best quality when I'm shooting, I need to rely a bit more on post processing than you guys with your nice SLRs. This program is really handy, thanks again!

dont be ashamed of post processing. use it to your advantage. the more proficient i got with my camera, the more post processing i used. in fact now i PP most of my shots.
i learned photography with an old Yashika film SLR, and had to develop my own pictures. took a high school course you see, lucky to have been taken it.
the process involved exposing the developed negative on photo paper through a projector, and i had to chose the exposure there as well, the timing, the framing, brightness etc.
so in effect, i was taking control of how the photo came out on paper! this is akin to post processing with digital. its just that, when you drop your roll of film at "one hour photo!" the machine goes through some default exposure settings and applies those settings to the whole roll.
there is no "right" way the photo should look IMO, its all in the eye of the photographer. i for instance usually overexpose for a high contrast, surreal look. my pictures dont look real at times, they are not supposed to!

edit: BTW, i use a Powershot G5, i think it's amazing personally, you just gotta know your way around the camera thats all. Would love to get my hands aorund a Canon 20D though, thats a NICE camera.

 

[Dyne]

Turning off my flash increased my photography skills by ten fold. Whenever I had flash on, it would make the image darker no matter where it was, unless I had a subject in front of me like a person. Now that my flash is turned off, I could take a picture of myself with just the light of my laptop in my room, and it would adjust the shutter speed perfectly.

Not to mention it's completely badass taking pictures with slower shutter speeds. Here are some of my experiments.

 

[nitewulf]

i like the last one a lot.

 

[SickBoy]

Yeah, there's an awful lot you can do without a DSLR. I miss the old DSLR (Digital Rebel) I used to have access to. But unless you frequently find your subjects in motion, it's not necessary. And if you've got a higher-end camera, even if they're in motion it might not be a huge deal.