Digital Rebel ISO problems. :(

[imakefights]

I photograph boxing often. And to do so succesfully you need a camera that can shoot in poor lighting without a flash with a high shutter speed. So I chose the digital rebel based on its maximum ISO setting of 1600.

Using the stock 15-55 lens with the lens fully open I took the pic below at 1/500 1600 ISO. And the result was very dissapointing. I then took my old Canon Powershot and took the same pic at 1/500 400 ISO and the results were virtually identical. Can anyone tell me what am I doing wrong? Did I just waste $800?

Thanks
http://members.aol.com/imakefights/compare.jpg

[Jon]

What aperture was used for either of those? For one thing, the light in the picture will throw off the metering. If you're really shooting in poor lighting conditions, you'll need a faster lens. The 18-55 kit lens is only about f/5.6 at 55 mm. The S1 IS is around 2 stops faster at that equivalent focal length, which makes up for the higher ISO. But you really need something f/2.8 or faster. There's the 50 f/1.8 which is good and cheap ($70-ish) but won't give you much reach, or some of the 70-200 or so f/2.8 zooms (but we're talking significantly more money here). Basically, indoor sports shooting can't be done successfully on the cheap. And your DR will respond faster than the S1-IS when you try to capture that moment.

[markubig]

the kit lens isn't fast enough for low-light photography w/o a flash. You need a better quality lens that opens up wider aperture to let more light in. People on this forum have been recommending the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 to me. Give you good sharp low-light pics and only costs around $350. I just bought one yesterday.

If you need that wide-angle of the kit lens, I read that the Tamron 17-35mm, f/2.8-4 is very good as well. The guy at the store yesterday said he uses the 17-35 and loves it. (about $470)

I guess depending on how far you are from the boxing ring, you might need a telephoto, but that's totally beyond what i've learned so far.

[OviV]

What mode were you shooting in? As Jon said you have a very bright light with an otherwise black scene. The camera meter will try to expose mostly for the light. There are a lot of controls on you digital rebel but they will not do you any good if you "point and shoot" with it. You need to learn some of the basics of photography and exposure.

Ovi

[imakefights]

Thanks for the advice. I do have a lot to learn. I guess I misunderestimated (Bushism) the importance of the lens in this case.

[OneManArmy]

you really need something f/2.8 or faster. There's the 50 f/1.8 which is good and cheap ($70-ish) but won't give you much reach, .
First, he'll need faster than 2.8 - much faster. Second, the 50mm is PERFECT for boxing. It was made to cover a boxing ring, I've shot many events with it with huge success. I did so on a tip from a pro who does a lot of boxing and have been greatful; the 50 1.4 is awesome for indoor sports. I would recommend that lens for boxing, or the 50 1.8, but the 1.4 is overall a better lense with more ability.

Forget 2.8 for indoor sports unless you have great lighting - fast primes are the way to go.

[Jon]

Second, the 50mm is PERFECT for boxing. It was made to cover a boxing ring, I've shot many events with it with huge success. I did so on a tip from a pro who does a lot of boxing and have been greatful; the 50 1.4 is awesome for indoor sports. I would recommend that lens for boxing, or the 50 1.8, but the 1.4 is overall a better lense with more ability.

Forget 2.8 for indoor sports unless you have great lighting - fast primes are the way to go.
Depends on how close in you can get. If you're ringside, the 50 might be enough. If you're a few rows back, you'll need more reach. It's still limiting, since you only get the one "perspective" relative to a zoom. But there have been more than a few threads here with sample photos demonstrating that f/2.8 is fast enough for indoor sports shooting. The problem's the arm and leg you sacrifice to get that speed in a zoom or long prime.

[OviV]

Although he may need a faster lens for his intended use, that is not the problem with the posted picture.

[imakefights]

Well I guess the whole point is moot now. Everytime I push the shutter button I get an ERR 99 message. I had read about some durability issues with this camera. I sure expected it to last longer than a few hours though. Now I guess I will have to ship it back to the seller whom I just paid a premium for next day air shipping :(


Bobby

[Jon]

Before you send it back, try:

Removing and replacing the lens
Using another lens
Cleaning the lens contacts (use a pencil eraser very carefully
Changing the CF card
Recharge the battery or change it
Change the battery backup (button cell)

[snibbetsj]

First do all the things Jon said. Hopefully that will take care of the problem.

Then try shooting that same picture at a shutter speed of about 1/10, 1/5, and 1/2 sec and see what you get.

1/500 sec is just too fast for f3.5 in a dark room.

[OneManArmy]

Depends on how close in you can get. If you're ringside, the 50 might be enough. If you're a few rows back, you'll need more reach.
If you're 3 rowsback, all you'll likely get is rope. But yes, I did assume he was right there at the ring, that's where photographers shoot.

Zooms are great if your subjects are moving distance a lot. Fortunatley in boxing/etc, they're in a confined space so the 50 is fantastic. Here's an example of a good shot in a boxing ring. No blur. The white balance is off though, they had tons of yellow light there, but it's an illustration. It was taking at around 2.0, 800iso and 1/250.

http://tracymilburn.com/public/img/photographs/sports/martialArts/DallasFightNight/200411/fullSize/141_4197.JPG

http://tracymilburn.com/public/img/photographs/sports/martialArts/DallasFightNight/200411/fullSize/142_4282.JPG

http://tracymilburn.com/public/img/photographs/sports/martialArts/DallasFightNight/200411/fullSize/141_4191.JPG

http://tracymilburn.com/public/img/photographs/sports/martialArts/DallasFightNight/200411/fullSize/142_4244.JPG

[tim]

Also try leaving the battery out for a few minutes, if that doesn't help leave the button cell out for a few minutes.

What everyone's said is good, a couple of thoughts:
- Even with a F1.0 lens that shot would come out badly, because the light throws the camera off.
- Do the same shot on P, but make sure the light's out of the picture. Turn on additional lights if you can, make sure none are in the frame. It'll use a long shutter speed, so you'll need a tripod, or set the camera on something and use the self timer to reduce hand shake.
- Try using the * button while pointing the camera at the dark part of the room - it'll meter for the dark not the light. If you take the same photo after pushing the button the light will come out bright white and blown out, but the rest should be ok.

[imakefights]

How do I remove the button cell?

[tim]

It'll be in the manual.

[imakefights]

The only reference I find in the manual is to the Date and Time battery which is a tiny watch sized battery. Is that the "button cell"?

[OviV]

That's it.

[imakefights]

Tried everything. The camera is defective. So much for my big plans to take lots of Christmas shots. :(

[S230]

I photograph boxing often. And to do so succesfully you need a camera that can shoot in poor lighting without a flash with a high shutter speed. So I chose the digital rebel based on its maximum ISO setting of 1600.

Using the stock 15-55 lens with the lens fully open I took the pic below at 1/500 1600 ISO. And the result was very dissapointing. I then took my old Canon Powershot and took the same pic at 1/500 400 ISO and the results were virtually identical. Can anyone tell me what am I doing wrong? Did I just waste $800?

Interesting that you mention this because I have a similar question as you.
I recently purchased a Digital Rebel but when taking indoor shots with poor lighting and fast movements such as on a dance floor, the Elph S230 is far better. Ironically, I am trying to retire my S230 but still use it more ofen than the Rebel because of this problem.
As many experts have pointed valuable advice to me on my other posting that I need to look into different lens.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50304
I will be looking into the 50mm f/1.8 lens and see if it makes any difference and will also be my deciding factor to keep Canon SLRs or not. I had already tried the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Series Lens (Expensive) on both the Rebel and 20D but still the images were grainy and blurred motion images even with flash on. Outdoors were fine.
Have you ever thought of using the hacked firmware? It can give you ISO3200. I am tempted but worried that I may render the unit useless.
Hope this helps.

[tim]

The S320 has an F2.8 lens at wide angle, which is a heck of a lot better than the kit lens (which I assume you're using). I think with the correct lens and some practice the 300D should take much better photos than the 230.

ISO3200's quite noisy on the 300D, but i'd rather have grain and get the photo than missing it. Neat Image does a reasonable job of cleaning it up, not perfect but definitely a lot better.

[snibbetsj]

If you get the 50 f1.8 you'll see an immediate improvement. That lens is 2 full stops better than the kit lens at it largest aperture and 3 stops better than at 55mm. That's 2 - 3 times more light, which can translate into faster shutter speeds. Don't give up on Canon DSLRs because you won't find anything better.

Merry Christmas :)

[S230]

If you get the 50 f1.8 you'll see an immediate improvement. That lens is 2 full stops better than the kit lens at it largest aperture and 3 stops better than at 55mm. That's 2 - 3 times more light, which can translate into faster shutter speeds. Don't give up on Canon DSLRs because you won't find anything better.

Merry Christmas :)
On the 50mm lens, would 1.4 make such a difference between a 1.8?
Another member, DocFrankenstein is going for the 1.4 and selling his 1.8. I do not have the necessary skills yet to really know the difference or benefit.

[snibbetsj]

The 50 f1.4 is about 2/3 stops faster (more light) than the f1.8. The major selling features of the 1.4 (besides the 2/3 f-stop) is a USM AF and the 8-bladed aperture (more pleasing bokeh). On the other hand, you can get the f1.8 for about $75 while the f1.4 is $310. At your "learning" stage, I'd go with the f1.8 model (that's what I did)


Merry Christmas and Happy Shooting :)