Need Help Shooting In Low Light (HS Dive Meet)

[tuggnet]

I'm very new to digital photography and have some questions about shooting in low light.

My daughter is a 1 meter spring board diver and I was asked to take a few pics at the meets.

I tried shooting in various modes but, alas, my pictures look like crap :( . Most are very blury.

Using a flash is right out because it violates the high school dive rules.

Here's one of the better pictures: Dive 010 (Orig) (http://chs.etbits.com/chs-images/Swim%20and%20Dive%20Meet%201-21-2005/chs%20010.jpg). or Dive 010 (Color Corrected) (http://chs.etbits.com/chs-images/Swim%20and%20Dive%20Meet%201-21-2005/chs%20010-CC.jpg).

The pic was taked with my 20D EFS 17-85mm IS 1/50 F5.6 ISO-800. The camera was hand held with IS off.

Thanks for any help and or pointers!

-et

[drisley]

Get a 50F1.8II or 85F1.8 lens, shoot in M or AV mode wide open (or close) and use a high ISO. Do not underexpose the shots or you will end up with alot of noise, as appears to be the case in the images above. ISO800 is very clean on the 20D when properly exposed. Also, set the AF mode to Servo, and use the center focus point only.
Hope that helps :)

[Citizensmith]

You need a faster lens. One thing the 17-85 is no good at is stopping action. IS lenses let you handhold in less light than normal but the shutter speed is still low and so you end up with motion blur. What you need to do is look at the exif data for a load of your photos and then pick a prime or two to cover the lengths you most use. The previous poster mentioned the 50 and 85 f/1.8 (the 85 is stellar) which would both work. Looking at the focal length of your example photo (33mm) you may also want to consider something like the 28 f/2.8 or 35 f/2.

The 35 f/2 is 3 stops faster than your lens (f/5.6 in your photo). That would push your shutter speed out to around 1/350 or 1/500 and easily freeze the action.

[toddb]

ya, the 50mm f1.8 is sooo cheep in price, defiantly worth getting if you can't afford the 85mm. It will really make a big difference. The only thing with the 50mm is that you might have to prefocus because I'm not sure the focusing will be fast enough and it might be easy to get off subject using the servo AF. I'd just manual focus and try to estimate the focus plane, but that is just me. Maybe if the subject filled up more of the frame servo would be easier to use. I think of using servo like in car racing with a big telephoto that I can fill the frame (not that I do this but just how I imaging when I dream of lens that I don't have).

[Olegis]

The 20D with the 50mm f/1.8 will be just fine for properly focussing and stopping the action, once you get past 1/250s or so (preferably above 1/320). Just use the Servo AF mode, as Drisley suggested, and shoot in Contunuous mode - some of the pictures will come out just fine.

[DaveG]

I'm very new to digital photography and have some questions about shooting in low light.

My daughter is a 1 meter spring board diver and I was asked to take a few pics at the meets.

I tried shooting in various modes but, alas, my pictures look like crap :( . Most are very blury.

Using a flash is right out because it violates the high school dive rules.

Here's one of the better pictures: Dive 010 (Orig) (http://chs.etbits.com/chs-images/Swim%20and%20Dive%20Meet%201-21-2005/chs%20010.jpg). or Dive 010 (Color Corrected) (http://chs.etbits.com/chs-images/Swim%20and%20Dive%20Meet%201-21-2005/chs%20010-CC.jpg).

The pic was taked with my 20D EFS 17-85mm IS 1/50 F5.6 ISO-800. The camera was hand held with IS off.

Thanks for any help and or pointers!

-et
You can start with as fast a lens as you can afford and pretty much the highest
ISO the 20D will let you use (H = ISO 3200). Noise smoise, if it isn't sharp it's no
good, so darn (so to speak) the noise and press on.

I don't know how close you can get so I sort of doubt that the 50 f1.4 would be all
that useful, focal length wise. But that 1.4 sure is appealing. If you do need
something longer the 100mm f2 is reasonably priced, gives you some reach, and
has excellent speed.

As much as I like my 70-200 f2.8 I think that 2.8 is too slow under these
conditions. A zoom would obviously give you more compositional control, but
once again you have to make it sharp, first!

There is something else to keep in mind. When you daughter springs off of the
board there is a point where she is completely motionless, and that's at the apex
of the dive. She's not going up, and she's not going down: she's just hanging
there weightless. Now that moment doesn't last very long but she's decelerating
to that point and then accelerating from it, so fast shutterspeeds AT THOSE
MOMENTS aren't needed.

Now this means that there is only one place where you could shoot and that
would be very limiting. For example by the time her hands are touching the
water she has picked up a tremendous amount of speed. But until you get that
faster lens you might want to try to shoot the apex of her dives and you could try
it at her next meet.

[J Rabin]

tuggnet:
Some time back I gave opinions on a similar post in this forum at this link:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43984
I think mine was 4-5th post down. The advice is still relevent. In your case, I would add the lens your using likely auto focus quick enough. But, we have the gear we have, right?
Set camera on manual at 1/250, ISO 1600, and lowest f/stop your lens will do when zoomed (you said f/5.6). Pre metering may be irrelevent for you since you have a slow lens, but do the old-fashioned hand meter mentioned in post. Do WB. Set camera to only use the center focus point and in servo focus. Practice panning, or catch the diver at high point before decent. Too much acceleration speed off board.
J

[Huckaback Photo]

Hi
Just my observations on your image & some ideas.
To take a good shot of the building and its contents could not be faulted in any way being both sharp and well exposed, but i suspect its the diver you really need the pictures of.

First problem as i see it, the girl is closer to the lights in the roof but there is very little light falling on her compared to the girl in pool (just look at skin tones)

Subject is not isolated from background sufficiently to provide a strong focal point to imediately grab the viewers attention.

The 85mm end of your zoom at f 5.6 is really going to struggle to give you sharp capture even at high iso settings (as already mentioned above).

So be more selective with your composition choose a longer rather than wide lens, if theres staged seating along the pool try various positions. I would use whats already been recomended by most above a wide open 85mm f 1.8 being a starting point right up to 200mm f 2.8 and yes you could be talking big money ( sorry you guys BIG BUCKS I mean)
You are trying to acheive good shots which would give any proffesional a problem without the right kit & knowledge.
By using slightly longer lens & wide appertures it should throw the background out of focus more, with more limited depth of field. use high iso settings , continuous drive is sometimes usefull.
if metering the subject is difficult and i mean the diver take a reading off your own hand in the same amount of light set this on camera and compare on preview or bracket exposure until correct, you will then have a constant value .
Finally your shot looks to be taken just after the highest point of the jump/dive from there on she gathers speed, so now use the panning tecknique following the dive and shooting as you move this should create some great blur if your lucky and works well with longer expo times try 1/60 instead of freezing the move at 1/500. We await any future pics as its always nice to get feed back.
Cheers
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

[DocFrankenstein]

so fast shutterspeeds AT THOSE
MOMENTS aren't needed.
She's probably rotating at those moments too though :confused:

[kawter2]

Get a 50F1.8II or 85F1.8 lens, shoot in M or AV mode wide open (or close) and use a high ISO.
I agree RIGHT ON!!

Also, set the AF mode to Servo, and use the center focus point only.
Hope that helps :)

Again I agree 100%

Do not underexpose the shots or you will end up with alot of noise, as appears to be the case in the images above. ISO800 is very clean on the 20D when properly exposed.

With all due respect, here is where I would offer a second opinion. One great attribute on your 20d is it's abilities by shooting "RAW". I would suggest either of the following two options

First off get either the 50mm or the 80mm so you can use a larger Fstop, and DO NOT TRY TO ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING WITH JPGs only RAW

1.) shoot Manual mode... TV@400 AV@between 1.8 & 2ish. Adjust your ISO as low as you can go with the camera metering the entire frame 2/3's to 1 stop underexposed. In the computer RAW conversion compensate for the under exposure

2.)shoot AV priority with the AV@between 1.8 & 2ish. Meter this with partial metering (looks like "[ ( ) ]" ) and exposure compensation under exposing 2/3's to 1 stop. Start @ ISO 800. If you are getting TV's under 400 bump it up to ISO 1600 otherwise shoot away. In the computer RAW conversion compensate for the under exposure

I think i am going to get some interesting comments to this theory, but I challenge you to at least try it. You might be surprised

[Huckaback Photo]

I will go with the under exposure, its amasing what information is in these digital files when even more underexposed than you suggest above.
over exposed you just have no info/detail left there to bring back in any processing.
shooting in AV mode works well for me.

[Cadwell]

1.) shoot Manual mode... TV@400 AV@between 1.8 & 2ish. Adjust your ISO as low as you can go with the camera metering the entire frame 2/3's to 1 stop underexposed. In the computer RAW conversion compensate for the under exposure

2.)shoot AV priority with the AV@between 1.8 & 2ish. Meter this with partial metering (looks like "[ ( ) ]" ) and exposure compensation under exposing 2/3's to 1 stop. Start @ ISO 800. If you are getting TV's under 400 bump it up to ISO 1600 otherwise shoot away. In the computer RAW conversion compensate for the under exposure

I think i am going to get some interesting comments to this theory, but I challenge you to at least try it. You might be surprised

My experience in shooting race cars in low light has been that the best policy is to go for higher ISO at shooting time and expose correctly. Shooting lower ISO, underexposing and then bringing up the exposure with software exposure compensation has always produced noisier images - I have tried it both ways (sometimes by accident - forgetting to increase the ISO in the heat of the moment). I always shoot RAW.

[ShutteringFocus]

I bought a Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 EX lens used for $500. It is still quite a bit of money, BUT the lens is awesome! I shoot lots of indoor sports for my school newspaper (swimming/diving being my fave!) I will admit our pool is new and pretty bright...but its still a pool...and for photography the light sucks! But the Sigma 70-200 EX is the lens for the job if you cant afford the Canon version!

The 2.8 lets me shoot in our pool with my D30 at ISO 800 and I use about 1/300 - 1/500 depending on lighting.

Check out this diving photo taken at 100mm 1/320 2.8 ISO 800 (on the D30 remember...it's a considerable amount of noise compared to the 20D's ISO 800)

[billsh]

I just purchased the 50 1.8 at christmas for shooting low light and used it this weekend for the first time. I was shooting at an indoor arena for a stock show my son was at. I've shot at this place several times in the last five years always with flash and had marginal success. Light falloff was always a challenge and while the flash helped stop the action ( 50 pigs in a ring walking around can generate some action LOL) it was apparent it was a flash shot. I was truly amazed the difference it made shooting at 1.8 and 2.0. I was able to get plenty of light and loved the shots. It also helped being able to shoot at 1600 with the 20D and not losing too much quality.

You have already been given a lot of good advice so I won't try to add anything. I think getting a faster lense will definetly help your photos.

[tuggnet]

Wow, what a response! Thanks guys. I'm looking into getting a faster lens as you all suggest.

Girl's dive season is almost over so I'll have to visit a boy's dive meet for a few shots when it starts in a month or so. We have one or two nationally ranked male divers here in the denver area (that I know of).

I'll post results with the new lens.

Again, thanks!

-et

[Huckaback Photo]

Not a diving shot but example of action in dance with 50mm f 1.8 original mk1 lens
needed max speed, Canon D60 at 1000 iso 1/500 f1.8 hand held. spent 3 days photographing European Brass Marching Bands in Kromeriz. Czech Republic. last year, as the dancers revolved quite fast this combination froze the movement totally and good detail throughout.

[drisley]

I agree Kawter about shooting Raw. Very good point.
However, again, I would not underexpose at all, ever, unless there was no other choice.
Trying to recover that much in software, even raw, will produce a fair bit of noise, and even worse, it can cause banding in the darker areas.
With that type of lighting in a pool area, at f1.8 and ISO800 or 1600 you should be able to get some very high shutter speeds.

[tuggnet]

I took your advice and ordered a Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens. Should receive it tomorrow in time for my daughter's last dive meet of the season on Friday.

I'll post my results on Friday or Saturday after the meet.

Thanks again

-et

[tuggnet]

I received my 50mm f1.4 yesterday and headed to my daughter's last dive meet of the year today. I'm very happy with the performance of the lens!

The pool had fairly good lighting compaired to most. These were shot at 1/250 f2.5. Much better than last time!

Let me know what you think about my first real attempt at shooting a dive meet. :) BTW, that's not my daughter :o

http://www.etbits.com/images/BLeague2005/AHS-1-thm.jpg

Additional images are here (http://www.etbits.com/images/BLeague2005/BLeague.html).


Thanks for all your help!

-et

[Volatile]

Awesome!

congrats...

[Huckaback Photo]

To all
This is good proof of how a few lines of words can help other photographers.
Pat yourselves on the back,well done .
Tuggnet, great to see the results so quickly, dont be affraid to use that lens wide open for best speed. great image i like it, background is much better this time far less distractions. try it with a small crop to put even more emphasis on the girl, who in my opinion would be delighted to receive a copy of this great image.
re the crop... get rid of any distractions (lights in ceiling) and also give some more density to top right (similar to our landscape workers burning in the sky or using grad filter), white or light corners tend to lead you out of the frame.
this shot has all that is needed just framing a bit.
by way of demo the crop idea i have been seriously cheeky so you can see my way also removed some lights.
its your image only you can decide. (Note will be removed after i post it ) Hope this helps.
Regards
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

[Huckaback Photo]

Only just seen your other images...excellent.
love the last one, looks as if she stopped to give a wave.
Martin

[DaveG]

I received my 50mm f1.4 yesterday and headed to my daughter's last dive meet of the year today. I'm very happy with the performance of the lens!

The pool had fairly good lighting compaired to most. These were shot at 1/250 f2.5. Much better than last time!

Let me know what you think about my first real attempt at shooting a dive meet. :) BTW, that's not my daughter :o

Thanks for all your help!

-et

With that lens you should shoot the next dive meet at f1.4. Your shutterspeeds are going to be around 1/1000 of a second and you'll pick up a lot more sharpness with the faster shutterspeed. Will you lose some shots to depth of field problems from missed focus? You bet. But welcome to THAT club too. The ones that ARE in focus will be a lot better. Besides at f2.5 you don't have much depth of field anyway.

It also looks like you have a green colour cast problem on the diver. I'd fix the diver first in Photoshop and then worry about the background.

[ripster]

There ya go! Looks like you got the hang of it! Pics look much better! Keep up the good work!...........Rip

[J Rabin]

Wow. Nice improvement there. Color looks pretty good. Looks like you may need faster than 1/250, depending on angle relative to athlete motion. If I may make one more suggestion: walk around and around repeatedly (if permitted) to find camera angles presenting the least background distraction to shots (tables, lights, etc.). Even get prone on deck to shoot just before entry and avoid ceiling lights. Or go to bleachers to find horizontal composition against neutral background. Nice job. J

[kawter2]

yea, great improvement, but you still need a LOT faster shutter.

I wouldn't let it get below 1/500.

In regards to depth of field, even at 1.4, if you are standing about 30' from the subject, you have about 10FEET of acceptable focus.

With diving you have it prety good, you could even use manual focus. Before the dive I would find something on the same horizontal focal plane as the subject on the dive. You can focus the shot and set up the AV/TV b4 the dive and just snap away when they take off!!


I'm eager to see the next round

[tuggnet]

I talked one of the coaches into letting me shoot at his invitational meet last night. Okay, so it was my daughter's coach :)but never-the-less, I was there.

I posted two shots over in the "sports" photo sharing area. kawter, DaveG, et. al., I took your advice and shot with a much higher shutter speed 1/1000. I also turned auto-focus off and manually focused on the water where I thought the girls would enter. That seemed to work well. I was off on several shots where the girls went further out than expected or higher than expected.

Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56288) for the other thread. As always, I appreciate your comments and feedback.

Thanks!

-et