[Samurai]

Generally Olympus E-system is not known for high ISO ability. But E-3 does decent enough job, despite the 4/3 sensor.

This one was shot at ISO 2000 at 200mm.



More here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/trave...-art-form.html (Yakshagana - A coastal Karnataka art form)




More here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/trave...pictorial.html (Bhoota Kola: A pictorial)

[Torqueguru]

Originally Posted by R2D2

That was shot with a D700 which along with the D3 and D3s is known for it's low light sensitivity.

I agree Shaju - you cannot beat the F1.4 for low light. Check this one out, I had posted this as a Diwali greeting in the non-auto image thread. Shot @ ISO200 with the 85mm 1.4G albeit using a tripod. All light is from the diyas. However this lens weighs over 2x more than the 50mm 1.4G (~600g v/s 280g for the 50mm) which is why the 50mm makes it into my bag as a 2nd lens for low light scenes.

Cheers!

Quite true what you mentioned about the D700, D3 and the D3s. I shot this in pretty bad light, well after sunset, at 400mm. so I had to go for a higher shutter speed and the high ISO performance of the D3s really came into play.
EXIF:
Exposure 0.002 sec (1/640)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 4000



Cheers,
TG.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Quite true what you mentioned about the D700, D3 and the D3s. I shot this in pretty bad light, well after sunset, at 400mm. so I had to go for a higher shutter speed and the high ISO performance of the D3s really came into play.
EXIF:
Exposure 0.002 sec (1/640)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 400 mm
ISO Speed 4000

Superb photo TG. I've seen your other fox series photographs (probably the same animal) in the non-auto image thread IIRC. Equally fabulous. What lens did you use? The D3s is a class apart in low light photography.

Cheers!

[Torqueguru]

@R2D2
Thanks! I used the 70-200 with a 2x Teleconverter. Model is TC20E2. Excellent optical quality is retained with this Teleconverter. Saved me the hassles of getting a 400 mm lens, though at some point I wouldn't mind getting one!

The combination of a fast prime, and the sensitivity of this body can yeild results quite unimaginable. Very handy for professionals who work in the field with no strobes, like for events, street, wildlife, etc.

Posting another sample, this ones at even higher ISO.

Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/4.0
Focal Length 50 mm
ISO Speed 10000

[Rudra Sen]

Originally Posted by shajufx

What a 1.4 lens can achieve can never be done with a 2.8 or other aperture lenses. According to me a 2.8 lens is not really a helpful lens when it comes to really low light photography like street, candle light etc.

Highly debatable topic is this. No point making this point here but I've taken shot with single candle light and f2.8 lens at 800ISO. I'm sorry not to paste those shots here due to client's requirement and restriction.

A matt black room with normal show window spot light, not halogen (to maintain the cooling from air-conditioner) at HighNote lounge at Bangalore. Singer Lou Majaw wasn't particularly standing but moving all over. Other fill light came from pink ambient effect LEDs.

f3.2 - 1/100 - 150mm - 2000ISO with 70-200, f2.8L, ISII

[Samurai]

Great Shot Rudra!

Here is a crazy night action shot with the object running towards me. Taken using 50-200mm at 101mm and F/2.9 - 1/100 - ISO800 in my old E-500.

[vikash49]

From what I have learned, the key to taking High ISO shots with minimum visible noise is to try and nail the exposure 'in-camera' rather than underexposing the shot in quest of using a lower ISO and then realizing the mistake later and increasing exposure in PP.

Here's a low light candid I shot with my 50D and Sigma 150 macro @ 1/200, f/2.8, ISO 6400

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by Rudra Sen

Highly debatable topic is this. No point making this point here but I've taken shot with single candle light and f2.8 lens at 800ISO. I'm sorry not to paste those shots here due to client's requirement and restriction.

In film days when one invariably had either 100 or 400 ISO film in the camera, fast lenses helped a lot. Even today for shots where the subject may move, you need higher speed hence it is either higher ISO or lower f stop. Many cameras perform poorly at higher ISO, so a fast lense is the optimum option, albeit an expensive one. A major problem with lense wide open is the shallow DOF, which may not be acceptable in certain situations.

[wildsdi5530]

I and a P & S guy. I am planning to buy a entry level DSLR and am looking at the Nikon D3100 and Canon 1100D. After going through a lot of user reviews and forums, I had decided to go for the D3100. Yesterday I went to a Camera shop and was shown both models. I was still with the D3100. The shopkeeper then said that he would suggest Canon for me.
Reasons were:
1. Nikon is simple to use so preferred by the lesser educated 'Professional Cameramen' but ad I seemed educated, I would be able to learn to use a Canon and use the better features.
2. World wide Nikon gives huge discounts and is a less premium brand whereas canon is never sold at a discount. This situation is reversed in India.
3. Nikon has a SLR service center only in Delhi while Canon can be serviced anywhere.

So now I'm confused again. I did not buy a camera and am going ahead only after your feedback.

[Rudra Sen]

Originally Posted by wildsdi5530

1. Nikon is simple to use so preferred by the lesser educated 'Professional Cameramen' but ad I seemed educated, I would be able to learn to use a Canon and use the better features.

I didn't understand this statement. Could you elaborate please?

[Lalvaz]

Lovely pic Samurai.

BTW, anyone know of any good weekend photography classes in Bombay? I'd like to try my hand at it, but would like to get some formal training before I take the plunge.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Rudra Sen

Singer Lou Majaw wasn't particularly standing but moving all over. Other fill light came from pink ambient effect LEDs.

f3.2 - 1/100 - 150mm - 2000ISO with 70-200, f2.8L, ISII

Superb photo Rudra ji. The subject just pops out.

Originally Posted by wildsdi5530

I and a P & S guy. I am planning to buy a entry level DSLR and am looking at the Nikon D3100 and Canon 1100D. After going through a lot of user reviews and forums, I had decided to go for the D3100. Yesterday I went to a Camera shop and was shown both models. I was still with the D3100. The shopkeeper then said that he would suggest Canon for me.
Reasons were:
1. Nikon is simple to use so preferred by the lesser educated 'Professional Cameramen' but ad I seemed educated, I would be able to learn to use a Canon and use the better features.
2. World wide Nikon gives huge discounts and is a less premium brand whereas canon is never sold at a discount. This situation is reversed in India.
3. Nikon has a SLR service center only in Delhi while Canon can be serviced anywhere.

So now I'm confused again. I did not buy a camera and am going ahead only after your feedback.

I think you have been thoroughly misinformed by your dealer. This probably shows his lack of knowledge or he's deliberately pulling a fast one on you. I would avoid such a dealer. DSLRs are complex electro-mechanical instruments that require at least some knowledge and/or experience to get the best out of them. Level and type of education is secondary.

Obviously you need to know at least basic English coz AFAIK they don't have menus in Hindi or other Indian languages as yet.

Both Nikon & Canon provide discounts depending on a number of factors including inventory clearances, market positioning, product demand (or lack of it), holiday seasons etc. This generally depends from country to country. Best discounts and prices are available in the US.

Nikon has service centres throughout India including BLR.

You need to decide what make is best for you i.e. Canon or Nikon and what format - APS-C or full frame. Hold the camera body in your hand and decide. You cannot go wrong with either one of them.

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by Rudra Sen

Highly debatable topic is this. No point making this point here but I've taken shot with single candle light and f2.8 lens at 800ISO.....

Sorry for the confusion Rudraji, my comment was related to the kind of shot what I posted: natural low light, noise-less, decent shutter speed hand held and that round bokeh in the background. Even in a dim restaurant light, I could get a shutter speed of 1/30 at 2.8 only at ISO 6400, where the image was not sharp enough. Reason for the previous comment was solely because, I could get better results and creamy bokeh in low light with a 1.4 than with 2.8. And the most important thing: I am not eligible or experienced enough to compare different aperture values and results as I have not passed from my Kindergarten yet

[Jaguar]

Originally Posted by wildsdi5530

1. Nikon is simple to use so preferred by the lesser educated 'Professional Cameramen' but ad I seemed educated, I would be able to learn to use a Canon and use the better features.

Originally Posted by Rudra Sen

I didn't understand this statement. Could you elaborate please?

Rudra, let me try and explain what he probably meant.
Nikon is easy to use compared to Canon. Hence it is used by small-time Photographers (who are not-so educated).
Bit, since the OP looks like an educated (read smart) fellow, he should be able to handle the (supposedly complex) Canon features.

I have heard a different version of the same from a proper (not a small time studio guy) professional photographer and a long time Nikon user. As per him, Nikons are easier to use than Canons. Since he knew I drive an Ikon, the analogy he gave was that Nikon is like M800 whereas Canon is like an Ikon.

Now coming to the original question, don't listen to what the shopkeeper says. Both the systems are equally easy/hard to master. The only difference will be the placement of buttons and menu options. Somewhat like the placement of wiper stock in Japanese and American cars.

Do your research, get the actual feel of both the cameras and pick the one you like most. Sometimes, going for a system which is more common amongst your friend/family circle also helps when it comes to sharing lenses.

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by Jaguar

Rudra, let me try and explain what he probably meant.
Nikon is easy to use compared to Canon. Hence it is used by small-time Photographers (who are not-so educated).
Bit, since the OP looks like an educated (read smart) fellow, he should be able to handle the (supposedly complex) Canon features.

I have heard a different version of the same from a proper (not a small time studio guy) professional photographer and a long time Nikon user. As per him, Nikons are easier to use than Canons. Since he knew I drive an Ikon, the analogy he gave was that Nikon is like M800 whereas Canon is like an Ikon.

Now coming to the original question, don't listen to what the shopkeeper says. Both the systems are equally easy/hard to master. The only difference will be the placement of buttons and menu options. Somewhat like the placement of wiper stock in Japanese and American cars.

Do your research, get the actual feel of both the cameras and pick the one you like most. Sometimes, going for a system which is more common amongst your friend/family circle also helps when it comes to sharing lenses.

Are you saying that canon offers more features than a Nikon, or just that Nikon is easier to use? M800 & Ikon comparison is just not fair.

Btw, I am not a canon user nor a Nikon user.