Home › Forums › Photography Q&A › Something's wrong with my lens (I think) :D
- This topic has 19 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 7 months ago by
Kina Lamb.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 18, 2019 at 11:18 am #40942
Kina Lamb
ParticipantI recently did the photos for a retreat I went to. One of my friends brought along a nice camera, so I asked her to help me, and we worked together. The first couple pictures I shot (inside) were ugly – drastically grainy, yellow, and dark. I adjusted my settings and was able to get those symptoms much reduced, but they still weren’t the bright + crisp photos I was hoping to get for the director. I ended up shooting most of the outside pictures, and either my friend or I would use her camera to shoot most of the inside ones. (Her pictures turned out nice and clear.)
At one point, I was sitting in a session with both cameras in my lap. I took a picture with each camera, and looked at them. Her camera took a nice picture, and mine took a not-so-nice picture. Then I switched lenses. My lens was on her camera body and her lens was on my camera body. My camera took great pictures with her lens, but her camera took {really} bad pictures with my lens. Therefore I know that the problem was in the lens. The settings were very similar (though her aperture goes lower.) Pictures below to illustrate the what I mean.
I wonder what the problem with my lens is. I clean it regularly. I know that it’s not a very good quality lens. It took great pictures outside! I’d love to figure out what I did wrong, as I’m going to be shooting another event at the end of this month with similar lighting conditions. 😀
Specs for the first two pictures of the speaker. (Both unedited.)
Picture #1: (Her camera, a Canon 80D)
ISO – 1600
70 mm
f/3.5
Shutter Speed – 1/160Picture #2: (My camera, a Canon EOS Rebel T6)
ISO – 1250
205 mm (telephoto lens 😀 )
f/5
Shutter Speed – 1/160.June 18, 2019 at 11:20 am #40944Kina Lamb
ParticipantJune 18, 2019 at 11:25 am #40946Kina Lamb
ParticipantJune 18, 2019 at 11:27 am #40948Kina Lamb
ParticipantThanks for your help in advance! 😀 😀
June 18, 2019 at 11:56 am #40957Ezra Morley
ModeratorHmmm…. That is quite a difference, but I think it’s not too hard to figure out what the problem is.
First, we are comparing a $1,600 lens to a $200 lens. I would hope that the expensive one does a little better! 🙂
But you have to realize that your exposure settings are quite different as well. Your camera is underexposed by more than a whole stop compared to hers: f/3.5 -> f/5 = 1 stop. ISO 1600 -> ISO 1250 = 1/3 stop. A total of 1 & 1/3 stops darker.
I’m sure @jamesstaddon will have some words of wisdom for you, but I figured I’d just chime in on the technical side of things. 🙂 If you want to go REALLY technical and understand how aperture and lens diameter and exposure settings make such a big difference, here you go: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/characteristics-of-best-cameras-and-lenses-for-nightscape-astro-photography/ He’s talking about photographing stars (REALLY low light), but the principles are exactly the same for ALL low-light photography.
June 19, 2019 at 12:02 am #40969Logan Lamar
ParticipantI found the same thing when I tried @jamesstaddon’s lenses (all pro grade L lenses) at a workshop! His lenses were nicer than mine, and so it was easier to get sharp images.
I’ve found that having better glass CAN—no, DOES—help. But great gear does nothing unless you know how to use it. And the best way to learn how to use a professional lens is to learn to maximize the one you have.To get to the root of your particular problem, I’ve got a few more questions.
First, what specific lens do YOU have? (i.e. I think it’s a Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS STM).
While great glass certainly plays a huge part in low light photography, there are ways to maximize what you’ve got.
So, third, what mode were you shooting in (Av, Tv, M, P, etc.)
What metering mode were you using?
And finally, were you shooting in RAW?The last three things are—I’m finding—great ways to maximize your current gear without having to drain your savings account on an upgrade.
Let me know your answers!
June 19, 2019 at 8:05 am #40975Ezra Morley
ModeratorFirst, what specific lens do YOU have? (i.e. I think it’s a Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS STM).
I think it’s a EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6. Not sure which model though… 🙂
So, third, what mode were you shooting in (Av, Tv, M, P, etc.)
I think it was Manual mode. 🙂
What metering mode were you using?
I’m going to say it was “pattern / multi-segment (5)” (whatever that means). 🙂 I’m going to guess it means evaluative or partial metering.
Just kidding… I’m not just guessing. I took a peek at the EXIF data.
And by the way, @kina, this photo was taken by the 80D according to the EXIF data… 🙂
Just for fun, I popped those photos into Lightroom. See the edited results in the attachments. Keep in mind that all I had to work with was highly compressed and resized web-photos. I’m sure you’d see even more improvement by editing the originals!
June 19, 2019 at 9:30 am #40978Kina Lamb
Participant@loganlamar @buddingphotographer It’s a Canon EOS Rebel T6 75-300 MM f/3.5 lens.
Yes, true. She told me she spent $3,000 total on all of her gear, and I spent $450 for all of mine. 😀 😀 Perhaps I shouldn’t be too worried. 😀
I was shooting in Manual. And RAW.
I am not absolutely positive, but I am pretty sure it was evaluative metering.
@buddingphotographer Yes, that is right. I took it with my friend’s 80D camera, but it had my lens on it. (That’s why it turned out so bad! I think.) Oh, I see – sorry! I think I said that it was taken with my camera, when I meant it was taken with my lens. 😀 Cool! Those are neat edits! 😀 Thanks for the article too! I shall try to read it. 😀- This reply was modified 55 years, 1 month ago by .
June 19, 2019 at 9:39 am #40979Kina Lamb
ParticipantHere’s another picture that describes the problems I was having at the beginning pretty well. I changed sooooooo many settings, it was unbelievable, ( 😀 ) and this was about the best I was able to get for this shot. 😀 I was so tempted to switch it to Sports, and maybe I should have, but I was stubborn and wanted to bear through with Manual. Again, this is unedited. 😀
- This reply was modified 55 years, 1 month ago by .
June 19, 2019 at 9:50 am #40983Kina Lamb
ParticipantOh yes! Specs for that pic are:
ISO – 800
F/4
Shutter Speed – 1/80😀
June 19, 2019 at 6:09 pm #41051Logan Lamar
Participant@kina
Couple of things:Yes, true. She told me she spent $3,000 total on all of her gear, and I spent $450 for all of mine. 😀 😀 Perhaps I shouldn’t be too worried. 😀
I think I may have found your problem. If you didn’t change your settings between switching lenses, your settings may have been correct for a lens with a faster (wider) aperture, but when you switched, your camera was forced to go down to what your lens would allow (I.e. from 2.8 to 5.0). If your other settings didn’t change to meet the new aperture, you wouldn have had an image that was underexposed.
On another note, it can be really easy for all of us to say “it’s just my gear—it’s lower quality”. While, yes, better gear will make a big difference in how our photos turn out (not to mention it will be much easier to get the better photo—I know your frustration with using a budget lens as I have one), how we use it makes a bigger difference.
A few things to maximize your current gear while using Manual.
1. Learn to use metering well. Watch your light meter. I really didn’t like the results evaluative gives me when using my 60D, and I was just introduced to spot metering, which I think is giving me better results (basically, you put the center point on what you want “properly exposed”—light human skin tones on the face of your subject work well for this—adjust your settings so you have a proper exposure, and then focus and take the shot).
2. Don’t be afraid of raising your ISO! A grainy photo and sharp is better than an underexposed photo which is, in turn, better than a blurry photo (I try to keep my ISO specifically on my 60D in multiples of 160… I read it in an astrophotography book. I’m not sure what the “best” ISOs are for your T6, though.)
3. Watch your shutter speed. Make sure it’s fast enough to freeze your movement and the movement of your subject.
4. Learn to edit in your RAW processor well. This is what @buddingphotographer was getting at. You should be able to use these “ugly yellow” shots! They look sharp enough, and I wouldn’t be afraid to brighten your exposure a little in your RAW editing software. It will likely introduce more noise than your camera does, but you need the image to be more properly exposed.
5. Accept and embrace the fact that your photos will have some of that grain until you upgrade to a faster lens. You’re indoors, and in a dark environment. It’s how it is!
6. If you want to uprgrade, but are on a budget, learn to stick to your widest aperture by not zooming in and physically getting closer or look into purchasing a prime lens (one that doesn’t zoom at all but will almost guaranteed have a wider aperture). You could also look into renting a fast zoom lens if you just have one shoot.You’re finding the limits of your gear—but by learning to work with them and and even to push beyond the limits, you can get some great shots with what you’ve got.
Good luck!
—LoganP.s. I would have checked the EXIF data… but I’m on an iPad which unfortunately has no way of looking at that (and I was too lazy to jump on our real desktop computer).
June 20, 2019 at 9:45 am #41074Ezra Morley
ModeratorAmen to all of the points above, especially #2 and #4.
I have read about, (and done some experiments on my own with) raising the exposure in LR versus raising the ISO in-camera, and in my experience there’s not even a detectable difference! (I didn’t want to believe it at first, but after seeing the results with my own eyes, I decided that I should quit worrying about it.) Of course it depends on the camera and software; some cameras compress the RAW files, so you would want to be more careful there, but I would not be too worried about pushing a RAW file in LR.
Obviously you should still strive for accurate exposure in the first place. For one thing, it’ll be less work in post-processing!
I think the problem in this case was a combination of underexposure and the WB being a little wacky, rather than the lens being bad. They’re not the sharpest pictures, but they’re not bad at all, considering the lighting and the lens being used. Those cheapo telephoto lenses are notorious in low-light…
Our eyes are incredible, and God made them to automatically adjust to color temperature changes, so it can be a little tricky at first to spot and correct white balance issues. Something I’ve trained myself to do is this: Look at something in the picture that is supposed to be white. What color is it? Is it bluish? Is it reddish? Is it yellowish? When I’ve adjusted the WB so that the white is true white, then I know it’s pretty close to what it should be.
Lightroom can do this automatically with the White Balance Selector tool.
Just click on it, then click on an area that is supposed to be white or neutral gray, and it will adjust the WB to make it that way. Often the adjustment seems WAY too drastic, but if you look at it for a while, and allow your eyes to adjust to it, you’ll find that it’s usually a great improvement.P.S. Take a look at that histogram in the screenshot. (It’s the one from this photo.) That’s what happens when you edit a highly compressed JPG file. 🙂 I pushed this photo to the equivalent of about ISO 6400!
- This reply was modified 55 years, 1 month ago by .
June 20, 2019 at 11:39 am #41077Kina Lamb
Participant@loganlamar Good point!
What about this photo though? This was taken with my own camera body and lens – I adjusted the settings as best I could for that situation and it still turned out like that, with no switching lenses involved.
1. Yes, maybe I should study metering more. That’s one of the settings I’m not fluent at yet. Do you know of any articles on the subject? Is spot metering a setting?? I don’t think I’ve seen that setting on my camera before.
2. You’re right. I guess I’ve been thinking of ISO as an enemy… 😀 LOL.
4. What do you mean by ‘RAW processor’?? Do you mean my photo editing program? I did edit these photos when I sent them out to people, but I just left them un-edited for this post to show them in all their glorious ugliness. 😀 BTW, I don’t have Lightroom. I just use “PHOTOS” for now. 😀
5. I agree. The only thing that bothers me is that I’ve seen photos taken with even worse quality cameras than I have in similar light conditions that turned out crisp and non-grainy even when unedited. So I know that it’s possible, and that I should be able to get better pictures! And they were that grainy even when ISO was really low?? I really think something’s wrong with my lens.
6. Oh, that is a great idea! Thanks! I’ll need to apply that for sure!I’m not going to upgrade until I get my drivers’ license and an MT certification, because I’m not making any money off all that I do right now, so it doesn’t make any sense. 😀 But yes, prime lenses are just sweet!! Lord willing, I would love to get one someday. 😀
June 20, 2019 at 11:47 am #41079Kina Lamb
ParticipantAlso, I mentioned that at the retreat, the photos outside turned out great. They did!
When I came home, we had a Bible Bee meeting in the evening outside. Because it was twilight, I had to raise my ISO to 3200 for it to turn out like this. Is that usual? I understand that the ISO is really high on this, but should it look that sandpapered and grainy?? When I zoom in, it just looks terrible!!! LOL 😀
ISO – 3200
ƒ/5
Shutter Speed – 1/320June 20, 2019 at 11:53 am #41081Kina Lamb
Participant@buddingphotographer Can you explain to me more about White Balance? Come to think of it, I don’t think I know much about that at all!! Yikes! This sounds so amateur, but… it’s not a setting on the camera, right?? Is it kind of like exposure? Or is it a computer editing setting?? If it’s a setting on the camera, (or a combination…) how would I adjust it? How would I know what a good White Balance is?
Thanks for the screenshot! I don’t use Lightroom though, so I don’t understand all of that. XD 😀 I might have something similar on PHOTOS though… I’ll look into it.
Wait, does that mean my friend uses JPG? 😀 😀
-
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.