Help with low light

[Michael Foster]

Hi all. I just discovered this forum and am excited to learn how to improve my photography. I have a Canon 70D with the 100-400 4.5-5.6 L lens. I have been learning on my own and changing my photography as I learn. I don't typically use an extender (though I do have one) just because I'm the kind of birder that goes out seeking them on foot and typically am hand holding my camera or using just a monopod. I started photographing the birds just to help me with ID as I still consider myself to be a newbie birder, though I have been doing it pretty avidly now for a couple years. I still rely on photos to help me ID the birds I just am unsure of. A natural result is my interest in getting better photos. I find myself cropping a lot, just because I still don't have the reach with the 400 and birds just won't let you get close enough. My biggest problem right now is in low light conditions. This pic is an example of that. I took this photo a week ago just after sunrise on a foggy day, so very low light conditions. I was excited to have found these ducks. In low light, this camera body just does not do well. I try to keep the ISO down, but have to have it up enough to capture the image at a reasonable shutter speed. I am thinking about a new camera body because of this.

This pic was taken at ISO 5000, f 5.6 1/500. I removed the luminance reduction to show how much noise I am getting in these situations. I hate having to use luminance reduction too much because of the loss of detail, but am constantly having to do it anyway to get a photo that is half way decent. Not sure if I am doing something wrong here, or it is just an equipment issue. This photo was cropped to about 15% of original. Oh yeah, this was hand held.

[Mike Hitchen]

15% is a tiny proportion of the original frame - high ISO and heavy cropping on a APS-C body is a combination you should avoid and there is little you can do about it. The 80D is a significant step up but will still be compromised, and if you go to a full-frame body (5D/1D series) the subject will be smaller in the frame and will need to be cropped even more so benefits will be variable.

Sometimes you just have to accept there is nothing you can do and use the photo simply for ID.

One thing you can try is doubling the ISO and overexposing by one stop or more (there are plenty of web articles on 'expose to the right'). This way the signal stands a chance of hiding some noise at the expense of fine detail - sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. However, with the subject here exposing to the right risks some serious blow-out of the whites.

[Michael Foster]

Thanks Mike. I may have underestimated the crop, but it was significant. I know that really doesn't help at all. After posting the pic and looking at the meta-data I realized that I was not fully zoomed in (321 instead of 400). In the heat of the moment, I just did not check this. I usually prefer to stay at 400 and only zoom out as needed, but I think the camera got bumped a bit getting out of the truck and it closed down the zoom a little. Certainly a lens with more reach and lower f would be great, but then the weight becomes a factor along with lugging a tripod and associated gear. I have a good backpack for this, but am more often tempted to just get out of the truck with my bins and the camera. The monopod doesn't add much, so I usually use it as well. I might try the trick of doubling the ISO to expose to the right ( I am aware of this technique and try to do it, but hate it when I see I'm bumping my ISO over 800). You might be right that the result would be better than exposing with a lower ISO and then trying to post process it. I am still thinking about gear as well. There is a lot to consider with that. Thanks for your help.

[Tim Foltz]

Hi Michael, at this distance and with such low light you're pretty much fighting a loosing battle. Even if you ran this through some noise reduction software
you would loose what detail you might of had. It's all about the light and patience when your subjects are this far away. Good luck in the future.

-Tim

[arash_hazeghi]

I totally agree with Tim, it's a non starter. you need to look at better locations where the birds are closer and in better light

[Michael Foster]

Hi Michael, at this distance and with such low light you're pretty much fighting a loosing battle. Even if you ran this through some noise reduction software
you would loose what detail you might of had. It's all about the light and patience when your subjects are this far away. Good luck in the future.

-Tim

Thanks Tim. I totally get what you have said here. As a photographer, it was not a great set-up, but as a birder it was totally awesome. These are not normal ducks to see in my neck of the woods and I was thrilled to have caught them on digital film. After looking at my metadata, I realized that my zoom was not set to 400, which is where I usually keep it. This was caught at 321 instead of the 400 my lens could have captured. I can make an acceptable photo by adjusting the luminance. Sometimes you just have to be satisfied that you actually saw the bird and this was definitely the case for me here. I only wish I had a chance to get a photo of these ducks in better light. Maybe someday.