 Deborah Liperote |
lens and grainy pictures I just purchased the 24-70 2.8L canon lens and used for the first time on friday at a wedding. I shot 2.8 1/60 and iso 800-1200 give or take depending on the situation I change the shutter speed obviously. so here's my question. I have shot the same type of scene with 50mm 1.4 and the scene is not as grainy as my new lens. is it because the optics on the new lens is more superior and more sensitive that there is more grain. I feel so discouraged with the shots in door during the ceremony due to the grainy pictures. could someone help with some words of wisdom on how to deal with this or tell me what to do. the only other thing I can think of is to use a tripod in order to use a lower iso. but clearly the reason I bought the $1000 lens was for a faster lens in this type of low light situation. help please
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
High iso will make grain. Slow shutter will also make grain. Image noise is not caused by lenses - it is in the sensor. Look through the lenses and see that the glass is nice and clean. If the subject you are photographing is really actually grainy, then it should look just so. Better lenses will pick up more detail; worse lenses less. Better sensors will pick up more detail, worse sensors will show more noise.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Don't ever go above 400iso. If you absolutely have to then use a little fill flash. Using a tripod will only help you get rid of blur. If the ceremony is too dark and you are not allowed to use flash then use 800iso. Indoors I use 400iso on my 24-70mm 2.8 with fill anywhere from 2.8-4.0 with 60th-100th depending on the look I want. Prime lenses will be tact sharp, but you have to move alot which means you might miss the shot if you are going for the PJ style. I shoot with the 85mm or the 50mm if I have time to set it up which is pretty rare at a wedding. My 24-70, 70-200 and 16-35 I use for the PJ stuff. What body did you use it on?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
I have a 30D. but what im saying is that under the same condition if I use my 50 mm 1.4 it's not as grainy even though I have used similar ISO. So are you both saying that I needed to use lower ISO and shutter. but if I did I wouldn't have been able to take the shot. I guess a 1.4 ap is a big difference over the 2.8 and I need to appreciate that. Any other suggestions???
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
A prime lens will produce a better quality shot.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
If there is a moving subject and you cannot use flash and you need a specific shutter speed, a smaller aperture will mean you need higher iso, producing more grain. 2.8 is FOUR TIMES SMALLER than 1.4 (two f-stops). So that means if you shoot 2.8 1/60 iso1000, you can also shoot 1.4 1/60 iso 250. 250 iso will not produce much grain, but 1000 iso will. P.S. If you must shoot with the new lens, perhaps just shoot with a slightly lower ISO and apply brightening and noise reduction with photoshop (or helicon filter or whatever) afterwards.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Also- If your new lens was for low light, it was probably only for quick focusing in low light. The wider the aperture, however, the faster the actual shutter speed. So, if you can focus fast enough, your older lens will do better with shutter speed than your new one. I'm not really sure what your new lens would be really perfect for. Maybe sunsets where you only want the sun to be in focus? I don't know. P.S. It is these $1000 lenses that keep me from stepping into the world of DSLR. lol I mean, it does NOT cost 1000 dollars to put together that lens. If it would, it would have perfect sharpness through a range of f-numbers from 1.0 to 22. lol
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
"It is these $1000 lenses that keep me from stepping into the world of DSLR." That, and the fact that you need a mule to schlepp the whole shebang around unless you want to break your back. And schlepp it around you must: thousands of bucks of high-tech camera gear is completely worthless junk if it's languishing in some deep dark closet because it's "to inconvenient today"....
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
I haven't been here at BP that much lately because I find it more of a big insult party than useful anymore. And thank you George for reminding me why I hate BP so much. That and the fact that I've been out shooting and making good money while others here at BP apparently have nothing better to do than sit on their computers and fling crap around. See ya later.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
I beg your pardon? Did I say something to offend you? Was it W. S. (He is always just semi-sarcastic, and a good commentator. Not an insulter.)? I take offense when you call answers and voiced opinions "crap." Aside from that, everybody has been helpful here. But if the fact that people who work at their computers and keep an eye on BetterPhoto users looking for help is what you hate and consider "crap," don't expect me to give you answers to your questions. What "insult party" are you talking about? I'm looking at threads and see lots of helpful questions and answers. In some cases, two people voice differing opinions and yield interesting information in the process. If that is what you consider insulting, I don't know what to say. So, aside from this post, I am just going to ignore your last comment and assume that there was a post here which was quickly deleted, or you accidentally posted in the wrong thread. Either that or someone took your user id and made a post here "for you."
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
It was to mr.george clooney. and I don't care what you say he is an idiot. thank you for your words of wisdom ariel but will(mr. clooney) cannot be defended. he is an idiot. all the time!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Deborah, he has an unusual sense of humor. What he was saying was a simple joke. If what he said was offensive, forgive me for putting it into different words. He was joking about the fact that equipment for SLRs is large, often requiring backpacks and bags, to get all of your valuable equipment on the photography trips; not only do you have to put effort into getting the proper equipment, it can also be difficult to use it sometimes. So he made this joke with a taste of sarcasm, which you didn't exactly take in the way he intended, probably because you just spent $1000 on a lens which doesn't work the way you had hoped. Don't think that I agree with what he says now or at other times, but I'm just hoping to give you insight into what he says and the way he thinks, so maybe you won't be so angry with him. And one member you dislike is not a reason to lose out on the valuable information and nice people found at BetterPhoto.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Oh, when I said not to think I agree with him, I meant that I do not exactly agree with the way he says stuff, and I don't want you to assume that I agree with everything things he says. I actually do think that the core behind much of what he says is correct.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
well thank you for trying to interpret him to me. but when he plays a round of golf there's actually 19 holes on that golf course. hee hee how's that for sarcasm! i'm just teasing. and yes it was very insulting to make jest of someone's trying to improve, get better equipment and learn more. I have come along way since becoming a member here but you never here Will mentioning anything about that in regards to anyone. NEVER a kind word always sand paper!!! But on a nice note I will finish my participation on this thread by saying that Justin has been a very good boy lately and Justin, you and your split personality, this week I am very much liking! You were helpful thanks!So were you Ariel. goodnite and goodluck
|
|
|
|
||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
Deborah, I just couldn't pass up the irony in this thread. Sift through all of the crap, and the only really useful facts were from Justin. Imagine that! Ariel - I'm not trying to knock you. I know you mean well and always try to be helpful. But your comments above are very basic and don't really answer Deb's question. What Justin said was true, prime lenses will produce better image quality than zoom lenses. But we're not talking about just any zoom lens here. The Canon 24-70 2.8L is one of the finest lenses made. Deborah - try doing a test with your 50mm and the new zoom lens. Using available light indoors, take some shots of the same scene with each lens set at f/2.8, same ISO, same shutter speed, same focal length. Compare the results. There should not be a huge difference in quality between the two lenses. The only thing that should affect the amount of noise in your shots under these conditions is the ISO. Higher ISO obviously will result in more noise. Slow shutter speeds don't produce more noise until you start to get over 15 seconds or so. The 30D is supposed to be very good with higher ISOs. Regardless, one lens should not produce more noise than the other if you don't change your ISO. Try the test and see how it goes. Chris Vedros
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Thanks Deborah, I am a good boy, but sometimes that gets too boring. I'm not a mean person, just like to tease a little. Some people take it as a tease and others as a hurt (sorry hurt takers). Anyway, back to photography. I don't do my own editing (I did at first), but my editor told me that my 70-200 shots look better then the 24-70 (which I was using alot). It looked better for the people and the backround also had a better look. I'm guessing that when I use the 70-200 I shoot from further away making the nose fit the face better (no dog nose effect),the backround blurs more and my 2.8 focus plane is bigger. Im sure if I shot at 70mm all the time that might change, but you know at a wedding everything is happening so fast. With the 70-200 you are forced to be over 70mm (which equals 100mm for M2N). Now if I'm using the 5D I would have to make sure I was over 85mm for tight shots. The 24-70 is a beaut when you can go from shooting 70mm to wider angle (pulled back full body). If I think about what I use at weddings the only thing I would need is 24-70 (close up filter - for macro), 70-200, and a 85. 2 - 5D's, 2 - 580ex, 2- pocket wizards and a tripod. Filter to protect the glass, polarizer and ND. Small 5in1 reflector.
|
|
|
|
||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Deborah, I have shot quite a bit in low light and with high ISO (1600 & 3200) and as long as my exposure is dialed in and I don't have to lighten the photo in PS, I don't get much noise. And I totally agree with Justin, a fast prime lens will perform better than most zooms (L or not). You may also consider noise ninja. I don't have it myself but read of its praises often.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Helicon Filter is very similar to Noise Ninja, and I use it. It is free, btw.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Somebody needs to shoot that bird.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Either your sentence needs the words "with a camera," or I'm chalking that up to teasing.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Yes I was. I thought the bird was a parrot cause it keeps repeating "free this, free that, wrauuk". Tell me this, if it is similar to noise nidja then why is it free? They say Coke and Pepsi are the same, but it ain't free whatever way you decide to go. So basically you are trying to sell the Safeway generic coke. You can fool the kids, but you can't fool good taste.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
If you don't like PEPSI than get off my thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Tell me why OpenOffice.org is free? It's like Microsoft Office XP edition, only it's free. Actually, the reasons for openoffice and helicon are different. OpenOffice is simply an open-source collaboration program so people don't have to use microsoft. Don't complain to me for informing people of good and free programs!
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Well, I just got back from the camera store and bought the 50mm f/1.4 and they were giving away FREE 2 liter Dr. Peppers. Just kidding but I did get a FREE flyer about a Light & Composition in Nature Lecture taking place here in Portland, Or with Lewis Kemper.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
I love Coke, but I'll take a Pepsi if I have too. Word to the wise "If it says free, don't buy it" -me
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Word to the smart: Don't buy what you don't have to. I suppose you have heard of Linux? Nice operating system. It comes with plenty of useful tools. Guess what? It is 100% free. As in freedom.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ariel Lepor |
Not as in gasoline. ;)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Blake T. Lipthratt |
I'm about to purchase a 30D and 24-70 L together as well...this is the first negative thing I've heard about the lens yet. So has anyone come to a conclusion what her problem might be? Hope I'm not getting excited over nothing. (buying the camera and lens I mean)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Every pro Wedding photographer has a 24-70mm L on the shoot. If you were ever in a bind, and are not full frame, you could shoot wedding the whole wedding with it. If you have a full frame 5D as backup then you have the range with both cameras from 24mm-100mm.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Sorry Blake! didn't mean to scare you! The lens is awesome... I just did an engagement shoot with it... OMG they are so sharp! the noise problem is from my settings not the lens!( from what has been drilled into me for the past couple of days since I asked this question) I didn't appreciate how awesome the 50 mm 1.4 was for low light situations so when I use the L series lens at 2.8 I just assumed they would be magnificent shoots(and they were very nice) but for low light in the back of the church you cant beat the 50 mm 1.4. But other wise the lens is a beauty. Crisp shots yummy! Get the camera get the lens get shooting!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Morning Deb, Have you signed up with DWF yet?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Weeeeellllll, it's not free! So iam debating. I did find canon digital photography forum and they have an entire wedding forum which I love and have become very active there. There is a BP member who read our thread and she joined DWF and loves it... told me it was worth the cash. So I am debating.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Natalie?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
Deb, why don't you just apply for the 30-day trial. Then if you like it, it is only $99 a year.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Who Me? |
If you follow their rules then you won't have any problems. You have to be good. They have your CC# so they know who you are and will kick you out if you misbehave. The Digital Wedding Forum (DWF) is an online community where professionals and aspiring professionals meet online, and discuss their art, sales, marketing and promotional techniques in a confidential, professional, and respectful environment. General rules Two very important vendor rules: You are not permitted to initiate any discussion about any product or service in which you hold a financial interest. Copyrights are a very sensitive issue to photographers: Disclaimer You agree that the DWF may terminate your use of this website if it believes that you have violated or acted inconsistently with the letter or spirit of these Terms and Conditions, or violated the rights of the DWF or any third party, with or without notice to you. Our Privacy Policy: Your phone number is not posted online, and is only kept in our office for contact purposes.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||