night parade photos -- one more question

[123SA]

Please help!!!!

I have a Pentax istD with a Sigma 18/125 (??) lens. I use only the automatic settings as I have not mastered the manual settings at all. Last December during MVMCP parade, I could not take photos. It simply would not take a photo. We were seated on Maint St near the entrance of the park, in front of the emporium. I couldn't even get a photo of DD in front of the teacups with the MadHatter. I pushed the button...and nothing. What should I have done?

We are going to MNSSHP this month and I'd like to be able to take photos. I really appreciate your advice!

 

[Groucho]

It should tell you why it won't take the photo. If the focus confirmation light is blinking, that means that it can't get focus, so either try again or focus manually. If it's something nearby, pop the flash and it will use that to help focus. If you don't want to use the flash for the photo, half-press the shutter until it gets focus, then close the flash.

If your lens has an aperture ring on it and it's not set to "A", the camera will, out of the box, not fire the shutter. Set it to "A" and let the camera take care of it. If you are using an older lens with no "A" on the ring (but still an aperture ring, which the newer lenses lack), there's a setting to tell the camera to allow that.

For night stuff, you really almost need a faster lens. (I'm going to guess that your Sigma is not a fast lens at all.) You might want to consider the Pentax 50mm F1.4, it's nearly as fast as you can get and fantastic quality, and a very good buy at somewhere around $175 after rebate.

Also, in low light, you'll want to manually bump up the ISO, just press the Fn button and you can set it there. If it's really dark, you'll need to use ISO 1600.

 

[ukcatfan]

You might also consider adding the FA 50mm f/1.4 or another fast prime to your setup. Low light shots are not the best situation for a zoom with a wide range like the 18-125mm Sigma. I have heard many good things about it, but low light use was not one. The aperture is just too narrow.

Kevin

 

[handicap18]

For night parades with a dSLR you really have to use one of the manual modes. Not necessarily Manual, but at least Aperture Priority. You might be able to get some decent shots with that lens, but I would leave it at the wide end, 18mm. Reason is with most zoom lenses, the more you zoom in the smaller the aperture gets. So at 18mm you'll have your widest aperture of f/3.5.

Set your camera on Aperture priority and choose 3.5. Change your ISO to 1600. From there you may have to adjust your exposure compensation to -1 (there should be a button on the camera somewhere that has a +/- on it, press that then use the dial to change it to -1, or -2 if needed). You'll want a shutter speed of at least 1/50th, though closer to 1/100th is more ideal. You should get decent results, but I can't guarantee anything. F/3.5 is about as small as one would want to go for an aperture size. F/2.8 is better and f/1.8 or 1.4 is more on target.

An even better bet, lens wise, is the Pentax 50mm f/1.4 as the others have stated. You can use the same settings I just mentioned, however, using f/1.4 will get you a MUCH MUCH faster shutter speed, than f/3.5 (I believe f/1.4 is 2 1/3 stops FASTER than f/3.5). Probably usually a minimum of around 1/80th or so. Though thats just a guess because it will depend on the lights on the floats and the lights that may be on around you. Main St is generally lit better, even for the parades, than say Frontierland.

 

[123SA]

Thanks for the info. I think I left out something. Since that trip I purchased another lens. It is a Sigma 70-300mm1:4-5.6. Will this be better than than 18-125?

 

[handicap18]

Thanks for the info. I think I left out something. Since that trip I purchased another lens. It is a Sigma 70-300mm1:4-5.6. Will this be better than than 18-125?

Not for night parades. It will do you great for Animal Kingdom and some of the other shows during the day (ie: Lights Motor Action, Indiana Jones)

The 1:4-5.6 tells you what the f/stop range is. In this case it is f/4-5.6. This means the widest aperture is f/4, but is at the 70mm end. As you zoom towards 300mm the aperture gets smaller and at 300mm (and probably starting somewhere around 250mm) the widest aperture is f/5.6. Its a good lens, but not good for the situation your describing.

Here is a chart of apertures to show you what they are like:

f/stops are fractions. 1/2 is bigger than 1/4. So, f/2 is bigger than f/4.

 

[AndrewWG]

Kyle,

Nice diagram! That really shows it well.

Andy

 

[Snurk71]

From there you may have to adjust your exposure compensation to -1 (there should be a button on the camera somewhere that has a +/- on it, press that then use the dial to change it to -1, or -2 if needed).

Kyle, I don't think I understand why you would darken the exposure on a night photo. Why wouldn't you want to overexpose +1 to lighten the picture instead of under at -1?

I've seen this mentioned before, but I've never understood the concept behind underexposing an already dark photo.

 

[ukcatfan]

Kyle, I don't think I understand why you would darken the exposure on a night photo. Why wouldn't you want to overexpose +1 to lighten the picture instead of under at -1?

I've seen this mentioned before, but I've never understood the concept behind underexposing an already dark photo.

You have to think of it like the sensor thinks of it. It does not see in color and instead sees everything as neutral gray. If it is presented with a bunch of black, then it thinks it needs to set the exposure high enough to make that black neutral gray. Obviously that would over expose the image, so you tell the camera to under expose compared to what it thinks is correct. The opposite holds true for situations where it is presented with a bunch of bright light. You then tell it to over expose.

Kevin

 

[caniswolfie]

Kyle, I don't think I understand why you would darken the exposure on a night photo. Why wouldn't you want to overexpose +1 to lighten the picture instead of under at -1?

I've seen this mentioned before, but I've never understood the concept behind underexposing an already dark photo.

If I think what he's getting at, it's a technique of being able to have a higher shutter speed when taking photos that are too dark for the lens and camera that you are using.

If you underexpose by a stop and then when you open the picture in Photoshop or some other image editing program and lighten it, you can maybe depending on the scene and the camera get a usable picture because the shutter speed will be faster to prevent blurring.

For example, if your camera only goes up to ISO 1600 and you are at the maximum aperture for your lens, that the best that setup is going to be at low light photos without a flash. If you underexpose a stop and lighten in image editing, it's like having ISO 3200 or a lens with a maximum aperture one stop larger (not exactly because the quality will most likely be worse than if you actually had those things). But in some cases may be worth it if it means getting the picture or not getting anything at all.

 

[Snurk71]

If I think what he's getting at, it's a technique of being able to have a higher shutter speed when taking photos that are too dark for the lens and camera that you are using.

If you underexpose by a stop and then when you open the picture in Photoshop or some other image editing program and lighten it, you can maybe depending on the scene and the camera get a usable picture because the shutter speed will be faster to prevent blurring.

For example, if your camera only goes up to ISO 1600 and you are at the maximum aperture for your lens, that the best that setup is going to be at low light photos without a flash. If you underexpose a stop and lighten in image editing, it's like having ISO 3200 or a lens with a maximum aperture one stop larger (not exactly because the quality will most likely be worse than if you actually had those things). But in some cases may be worth it if it means getting the picture or not getting anything at all.

I think I finally get it - if it's about making sure you don't get a blur and try to lighten the pic in post processing. That makes sense.

 

[handicap18]

I think I finally get it - if it's about making sure you don't get a blur and try to lighten the pic in post processing. That makes sense.

Thats pretty much it. You can do the same thing in MANUAL mode, however the difference, I find, is that if you use the EC +/- the camera will still change the shutter speed. So lets say, the best you get without EC is 1/40th. Then you apply the EC to -1 and now the camera is set to 1/80th. You might be underexposed, but you wont get the motion blur and like others stated, you can adjust some brightness or other stuff in post processing. Also by using the EC instead of MANUAL, there may be some times when the meter reads the situation and gives you the 1/80th speed, it will still bump the shutter speed 1 stop.

You could just use manual mode and uderexpose everything by using your widest aperture and set the shutter to 1/60th or 1/80th. You'll get the same result, then brighten things up in PP.

If you overexpose, use a +1, then your shutter speed becomes 1/25th, now the lighting may be great, but everything but the lampost, the ground and that guy standing across from you on the other side of the street who is litterally just standing there, like a statue, expressionless, not blinking and barely breathing and your thinking is he enjoying himself are out of focus because of motion blur. You can't fix that in PP. (though you can photoshop that annoying guy out of the picture thankfully!!)

I haven't used them all, but I know with some RAW post processing software you can specifically re-adjust the EC by +1. Then you get the proper lighting and you have your motion frozen image.

Plus I believe I've read a few places, including here, that underexposing gives you better chance at better detail in the photo. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong or stated it incorrectly.

 

[Snurk71]

As long as I've extended this thread, I might as well ask a question about post processing.

I have PSE 4.0 and have played around with levels and layers to brighten a subject (following examples in Scott Kelby's book). I assume I'm not missing some other key trick in lightening the photos a bit?

 

[boBQuincy]

Most cameras meter the entire image, giving extra weight to one part or another, but if the image is 95% dark and 5% bright it will almost always figure the image needs to be brighter and set the exposure accordingly. The problem is when you want that 5% to be the main subject and it comes out way too bright.

Adjusting the exposure (-) will usually work. A spot meter is better, where the meter only looks at the central portion of the image.

Underexposing may keep the 5% bright area from overexposure but underexposure also leads to increased noise. Correcting in PP can really bring out the noise.

 

[123SA]

For night parades with a dSLR you really have to use one of the manual modes. Not necessarily Manual, but at least Aperture Priority. You might be able to get some decent shots with that lens, but I would leave it at the wide end, 18mm. Reason is with most zoom lenses, the more you zoom in the smaller the aperture gets. So at 18mm you'll have your widest aperture of f/3.5.

Set your camera on Aperture priority and choose 3.5. Change your ISO to 1600. From there you may have to adjust your exposure compensation to -1 (there should be a button on the camera somewhere that has a +/- on it, press that then use the dial to change it to -1, or -2 if needed). You'll want a shutter speed of at least 1/50th, though closer to 1/100th is more ideal. You should get decent results, but I can't guarantee anything. F/3.5 is about as small as one would want to go for an aperture size. F/2.8 is better and f/1.8 or 1.4 is more on target.

An even better bet, lens wise, is the Pentax 50mm f/1.4 as the others have stated. You can use the same settings I just mentioned, however, using f/1.4 will get you a MUCH MUCH faster shutter speed, than f/3.5 (I believe f/1.4 is 2 1/3 stops FASTER than f/3.5). Probably usually a minimum of around 1/80th or so. Though thats just a guess because it will depend on the lights on the floats and the lights that may be on around you. Main St is generally lit better, even for the parades, than say Frontierland.

So, if I get this new lens, in what other circumstances would I use it? My concern is, in this particular case, I will be travelling with 3 kids 7,4,2 and the idea of carrying 3 lenses along with the camera itself, diaper bag, bottle (yes, darn it we haven't eliminated it yet) and all the other kid stuff I seem to cart around, isn't very appealing.

I am quite obviously a camera novice with a camera too sophisticated for me. I really do appreciate your efforts to educate me.

 

[handicap18]

So, if I get this new lens, in what other circumstances would I use it? My concern is, in this particular case, I will be travelling with 3 kids 7,4,2 and the idea of carrying 3 lenses along with the camera itself, diaper bag, bottle (yes, darn it we haven't eliminated it yet) and all the other kid stuff I seem to cart around, isn't very appealing.

I am quite obviously a camera novice with a camera too sophisticated for me. I really do appreciate your efforts to educate me.

I'm right with you. We're going the week after Thanksgiving with a 5 1/2 & 3 year old along with a 15 month old.

I will admit upfront that for me and and for you the lens situation is different as I'm 6' 270lbs so its not as much as an issue for me. The 50mm lens is very small. Mine (I have Nikon's version) can fit in my front pocket (I like to wear baggy shorts, so take that into consideration).

I love having my 50mm lens. It is very sharp. I'll use it occassionally as a general purpose lens around the house and yard. I also use it as a portrait lens. I've gotten awesome portraits of the kids, to the point that a few people have asked where we had them done.

I know Groucho used his 50mm f/1.4 on his Pentax he last trip to WDW a lot. Probably more so than many people would, but everyone has preferences.

 

[123SA]

Ugghhh...I think the issue now is I just waited too long. I could run out now and get the lens, but I need time to play with it so that I understand in what situations it works! Since it is small I think it will fit in my camera bag...

Again, thanks for all of your help.



Yikes!! I ordered it. Should get here by Monday. That gives me 2 weeks to master it. Any suggestions for how to practice for parade photos???

 

[123SA]

Will the 50mm f1.4 lens be good for Fantasmic or indoor rides where no flashed is allowed?

 

[Groucho]

So, if I get this new lens, in what other circumstances would I use it? My concern is, in this particular case, I will be travelling with 3 kids 7,4,2 and the idea of carrying 3 lenses along with the camera itself, diaper bag, bottle (yes, darn it we haven't eliminated it yet) and all the other kid stuff I seem to cart around, isn't very appealing.

Well, you CAN use it a lot. My last WDW trip, I used it for nearly half my photos. It's not very good for family photos, though, because you need to be pretty far away to get in a whole person.

Your 70-300mm lens is probably not going to get much use at all, outside of maybe Animal Kingdom. Disney parks are usually not conducive to heavy zoom. Everyone has their own preferences, but by and large, you're either fairly close to things or they're pretty big, so wider is better.

I haven't tried using it for Fantasmic, but it will probably be good depending on how far away you are and how close you want to be. Since it's not a zoom lens, you need to move yourself to zoom in and out. For dark rides, it depends - some are just too dark for anything. (See my current "live from Disneyland" thread for a few examples from that lens.) Ultimately, very, very few lenses are faster than F1.4 - basically, you can't do much better than that for any low-light situation, and the Pentax 50mm is widely renowned for its sharpness, so you can certainly get some wonderful shots with it. If it can't do it, chances are that no other lens will.

 

[123SA]

Thanks for the info. You are in DL now?? Your photos are great. I hope this new lens works out for me, but I am sure it will be years if ever, before I end up with photos on par with yours.