Can anyone reccomend a good digital SLR for night shooting?
2007-10-13 13:33:59 · 6 answers · asked by steve 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
I'm looking for something with a bulb setting, cable release, and capable of shooting in RAW.
2007-10-13 14:36:47 · update #1
Most of the DSLR cameras are good for night shooting. the brand of the camera is not a thing but the stability of your tripod is a must. if you take a pic in a few seconds , the camera should not move a bit.or vibrate.So carry a good tripod of Manfrotto or better than that. Nikon has long exposure and high ISO noise reduction system.but better take it up to 200 ISO. Nikon D40,D70, D80,D200 and D2X is better but price and quality varies. canon's 400D, 5D, 1Ds mark2 are very good for that and Sony alfa100 is also good. Everything is depens your budget.
if you have enough money to buy a 120mmDSLR like hasselblad, buy a digital back of PHASE ONE P45+ and get the best result in night shots.
2007-10-13 16:40:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In general, any DSLR will allow you to take good quality night photographs. The main thing to look for is the ability to change the camera to manual so that you will have complete control over shutter speed and aperture. Most night photography is actually shot with slower film speeds (around 100 or 200) so grain/noise shouldn't be a problem. I have seen a few reports of banding, or odd streaks of noise, on some DSLRs with exposure times of over 14 seconds but those are mostly glitches and not indicative of any one camera - just something that occasionally has to be repaired.
Good luck,
Liz
http://photography.about.com
2007-10-13 13:42:23 · answer #2 · answered by Photography.Guide@About.com 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well a f2.eight or f1.eight lens will provide you abit extra gentle. So say you had been taking pictures and proper publicity at a given ISO used to be one million/15 seconds, with an f1.eight lens you might get proper publicity at one million/60 seconds. one million/60 you'll be able to conveniently handhold, one million/15, now not such a lot. That calculation is with out Image Stabilisation. So yeah a lens with a greater aperture would aid somewhat bit. But it may not aid, within the above instance, if proper publicity used to be one million/eight seconds along with your present lens. So assuming you are speaking approximately "relatively within the night time" I imply no traditional gentle whatsover and perhaps a tiny bit of sunshine from a few small home windows in a constructing neighborhood, even the quickest lens isn't going to aid you. Now assuming you are photographing constructing, streets, cityscapes (just about static items), then you definately could be a lot bigger off saving you cash and shopping a tripod. For such matters even the most affordable tripod (with a purpose to often be alittle wobbly) can be of extra use than a lens. If you're photographing topics that more often than not don't remain nonetheless. Say individuals for example, then you definately'd great purchase a flash. However for this something a quicker lens would honestly be priceless. The indisputable fact that individuals can conveniently be moved is for your talents. You might for example transfer the discipline to instantly below a avenue lamp, with a rapid lens you'll then have tons of sunshine to paintings with. (It's nonetheless advissable to have a flash regardless that).
2016-09-05 08:13:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
One with full manual control, as Liz said. You'll also need a good tripod and a cable release.
Check fotosharp.com for their "Day & Night Exposure Guide" - its a great tool.
Scene 14, 'City Skyline In Distance'
ISO 200
f8
15 seconds
f11
30 seconds
Is just one example.
2007-10-13 14:08:14 · answer #4 · answered by EDWIN 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
About Arabian nights reality
2015-03-14 10:14:18 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they are all good, ive used D5, D400 and A100 and they all cope well,
a
2007-10-13 15:30:03 · answer #6 · answered by Antoni 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋