Blurry, out of focus, grainy low light photos Noki...

Hi,
I have had a Nokia N95 8GB since April and on the whole I am really happy with everything apart from the camera. Day time shots as far as I can tell are OK but night time/indoor/low light shots are a different story. A lot of shots are grainy, the flesh tones don't look right (face shots have odd red speckling) and very often the shots are simply out of focus or very blurred (like camera shake). This despite me trying to be very careful to keep the camera totally still. I have also experimented with different settings - custom, night portrait etc. All to no avail.
I have previously owned a Casio Exilim Z750 camera which I used to use when going out with my friends, but I was hoping that I could leave that at home as it didn't make sense to carry that as well.
Please has anybody else had similar problems? How can I fix this?
thanks,
Dom.

That sounds about right. Night shots (or low light shots) are not very good with the N95 or N95 8GB.
If you use the flash the subject needs to be about 1m from you otherwise the flash is useless.
640K Should be enough for everybody
El_Loco Nokia Video Blog

Similar Messages

Blue streaks in low light photos? iPhone 4s

Is anyone else having blue streaks show up on iphone 4s photos? Only happening in low light/indoor photos. Daylight photos are great. I don't have a case on either. Any thoughts?

Definitely a hardware issue. Took it to the Genius Bar, they swapped the camera out of my phone (didn't know they could do that) in about 15 minutes.

G2 Camera focus issues low lighting

Hello. I go to a lot of music festivals and I like to take pictures of the stage and lighting. I have noticed that my camera goes in and out of focus when I try recording/taking pictures of the stage. It doesnt pick up individual lights on stage, it looks like just a big blob of light. My friend has a galaxy S4 and the camera picks up the seperate lighting just fine. I have tried the different camera modes, different quality and it all is the same. Is a way to fix this, is this a known issue, will there be a resolution for this when I get Kit-Kat?

lnsunshine,
Oh no! We want you to be able to enjoy taking pictures. Thank you for the camera settings provided. What is your brightness set to in the camera settings? Also, what is the "White balance" set on? Have you attempted to reset just the camera settings? Camera>Settings (Gear)>Reset.
LindseyT_VZW
Follow us on Twitter @VZWSupport

Fuzzy / Blurry / Out of Focus 24inch GDM-FW9010

My 24inch GDM-FW9010 keeps going out of focus. Even the On screen Display is fuzzy so I know it's not a video card issue. To resolve it I need to power cycle the monitor, some times several times. Is this monitor end of life or is there a trick? Degauss doesn't help either.
Thanks,
20/20
This picture itself is NOT out of focus, notice the "SUN" is in focus but the screen is fuzzy

Does the focus drift out faster in the morning when it's colder or later in the day after the monitor has warmed up a lot?
Paul.

3gs won't focus in low light conditions

Unless I am in 100% daylight my camera won't focus where I tap. In fact only macro shots will focus.
Sometimes I see the camera focus when switching between video and camera mode but only briefly and then it goes back to macro mode. On occasion restarting the phone a few times will fix it but it mostly won't focus.
Is this just my phone or do other people have this issue?

Not sure how the iPhone camera does it's autofocus..many cameras use an infrared ranger. If the infra red led emmitter is sheilded it can't function and thus no auto focus. If this is how the iPhone camera works, have you sheilded any infra red sensors, badly fitting case, bad screen protector ?
Message was edited by: Denis247

5d mark III focusing slowly/etc. in low light wedding receptions

I've been using 5d2s for a long time because I am simply not rich enough (and I don't want the huge body either) to buy 1d-series cameras for work. I've shot about 20 weddings with the 5d3 since I bought it, and I finally sent it in to Canon the other day for an autofocus checkup.
My #1 issue is reception autofocus. My 5d2s beat my 5d3 at reception focusing (with 580EX AF assist always used). They are more reliable for AI servo and faster for one-shot.
My 5d3 struggles to acquire in one-shot, taking probably close to 2 real seconds (it feels like forever) to establish and confirm a lock on a static subject during wedding receptions with lenses like 24L II, 35L, 50L. In contrast, in the exact same lighting conditions and with the same lenses and flash AF assist, my 5d2s all snap right to focus and I click the shutter within about 1 second or less, getting an in-focus image about 90-95% of the time.
With AI servo, the 5d3 is just inferior to my 5d2s in low light. I was hoping, one day, to get a camera that would give me the ability to track subjects well during processionals/grand entrances/reception dances using the outer points, because I'm pretty tired of being stuck with center-point framing for these situations. I thought the 5d3 was supposed to solve that problem, but in fact it took a step backward in low light AI servo accuracy and locking. My 5d2s (center point) both acquire faster and track better in low light than my 5d3 (center point also).
After sending the 5d3 in to get it checked (and so they could charge me $175+), I got a nice copy of the page saying that the camera focus in low light is blah blah etc. etc. use AF assist (which I had noted I did) and the overall feeling was that they were very condescending and disregarding of my equipment issue. To me, a $3500 camera should perform better than a camera that is now worth ~$1300...and so the 5d3 performs arguably better in GOOD light, simply because it has more focus points to choose from which are generally pretty accurate - in GOOD light. However, it performs worse in reception light. Wedding photographers will understand what I mean by reception light.
My 5d2 AI servo is not useless during receptions, but my 5d3 AI servo struggles more in the same reception lighting. My 5d2 one-shot locks quickly and pretty accurately during receptions, while my 5d3 takes significantly longer in one-shot to lock, and sometimes it gives me pretty wild misses, during receptions. Always using AF assist with 580EX, and btw the 5d3 firmware is the latest version (1.2.3 at this time). The camera simply focuses slower during receptions than my 5d2s, and AI servo misses more.
I also don't like that AF points don't light up before focusing, but this is less important to me than a fast, responsive AF system for wedding receptions. I have had to put away the 5d3 on multiple occasions and bring out a second 5d2 for wedding receptions just so I can get good dancing photos, good speech/toasting photos, etc., before all the key moments went by and ohhhh too late, my focus system didn't lock in time...
I have been having this issue with 5d3 performance since I bought it close to a year ago. I do wedding photography primarily, and I have quite a bit of experience shooting weddings and dealing with the various demands of weddings.
Most of my AF experience is with single point, with only a few experiences using the expansion settings. I have never had trouble locking or tracking with single point with my 5d2s as long as there was enough light to do it, and being used to that I expected the 5d3 to be able to perform at LEAST comparably. It does not.
At this point, this critical functional limitation of the 5d3 has left me very dissatisfied with the camera. I thought upgrades were supposed to do everything just as well or better than the previous version, but this newest camera has shown me that more AF points definitely does NOT mean a better (or even comparable) AF system in every situation. Clearly something was traded off when they added a ton of cross-type points, like low light acquisition speed and being able to see your AF points illuminate when you start AF.
I've been playing around with Nikon equipment for a while and am beginning to think that is my forced alternative. I don't like the things I hear about Nikon customer support, and I don't really like the direction they are going with some of their releases or how they handled function issues (focus issues with off-center focus points, oil on sensors, etc.) but Canon isn't innocent of that stuff either. And if I use an all-Nikon setup then I will have excellent dynamic range at low ISOs as well. Too bad Nikon doesn't have the glass I like best (35L, 85L, etc.)...but compromises must be made in some direction, and I'm intensely frustrated with Canon's latest cameras' focusing systems in low light.
It's very specific, mind you: Low light performance is inferior to my 5d2s. In good light, my 5d3 has better AF flexibility for tracking with outer points, and the one-shot focus acquisition is comparable to my 5d2s.

This singular issue of the 5d3 has ensured that I will never buy another one (unless they fix that, which they won't). Unlike what I did with the 5d2 (upgraded to 5d2s towards the end of their product cycle), the 5d3 is too impaired for low light photography for me to be able to replace my 5d2s with 5d3s. I can only hope the next generation will NOT have the same low light focus delays...otherwise I might have to buy a few 6Ds just to keep up with more current tech (since my 5d2s will wear out eventually). I've heard they don't have the same doublechecking delay, but they also have other limits that I dislike (1/4000 ss, 1/180 flash sync, no pc sync port, SD memory only) and will have to work around.

Yellow photos in low light

My pictures taken in low light (indoor), just one small bulb for example gets yellowish. I tried to change the white balance but for no good. Is it just something I have to accept or what?

But of I look at photos taken with iPhone 5s for example, they're much more natural in the colors. Therefor I don't think that the bulb is the problem. I thought that my z1c was the best to take low light photos when I bought it almost one year ago. But oh no!

Images out of focus?

I've been using ACDSee as a photo viewer/organzer and linking to photoshop for editing. I recently upgraded to cs5 photoshp and finally decided to try Bridge since I figured the integration would be better and figured bridge would be using the same monitor calibration profile as photoshop.
So it's a nice program, BUT - all my images (preview/slideshow) are out of focus (or low resolution/quality). I searched for settings everywhere in the preferences, even turning on/off software rendering, with no apparent affect. They're sharp in photoshop and every other photo viewer I've ever tried, so I figured I was missing something really obvious. I called adobe support and installed their "desktop sharing" software. The rep then had me reset bridge to all defaults, open an image, then open the same image in photoshop AND acdsee. He verified that the image in Bridge was not as sharp as both photoshop and acdsee. He explained that bridge didn't use the same imaging technology as photoshop (really) and that bridge was intended as a front end to photoshop to aid in selecting images for later editing.
I explained that as a photographer I couldn't use bridge to select images for editing if I couldn't tell WHICH ONES WERE IN FOCUS (emphasis mine). I'd have to load them all into photoshop to determine that, so what use was bridge? He said he was going to check on that and left the call for a while, then came back and reiterated that he was correct...that bridge wasn't meant for the quality of viewing I was looking for. He said he would suggest that as a future enhancement. I said that didn't make much sense since I must be living on another planet if no one else has ever complained about this since the initial release of bridge way back when. He politely laughed.
So I'm completely mystified...is that actually correct?...That the images viewed in bridge are presented in a lower image quality than photoshop??? (or even ACDSee??). I like the program and its interface, but I can't use it if I can't even determine which images are in focus. PLEASE tell me the support rep was inadequately trained...
I'm running windows 7 64 bit...in case it matters my graphics adapter is composed of dual nvidia GeForce 8800gtx cards with basically default settings, using the latest nvidia drivers (which were just updated last month to specifically support the video hardware utilization of CS5).
Thanks in advance for any help/suggestions/explanations!

Ahh, I see another idiot has been suckered in by the business model of Adobe Inc. When I first purchased CS4 I had many, many problems with Photoshop, Bridge and InDesign. It is these three programs I utilize the most with a little of Dreamweaver and even less of Illustrator. After nearly a week spent both online and on the telephone we came to the conclusion that some hidden software code that entegrated the suite, and which each software package shared to some unknown degree, did not like my NVidia GeForce 9800GT video card.
After a two step process of testing updated drivers from NVidia and totally reformatting my entire computer the various graphics card problems were not resolved. Did you notice that I had to reformat my entire hard drive? That entailed a week of installing each and every program (over 40 of 'em) and locating and updating all the various drivers for some fairly mundane attached cards and equipment. The problems with Adobe were not resolved. Not one!
The problem I had with Bridge CS4 was similar to yours and still on occasion occurs. The displaying of thumbnails as extremely low resolution blobs of pixels. The solution is not related to the preferences but more to the handling of pixels between Adobe's graphics display code and how it interfaces with my NVidia display adapter. I have seen similar problems with other iterations of the NVidia display adapter. As you have seen Adobe's motto seems to be: We are God and everyone must bow to us. In the industry the proper manner is for the display adapter manufactuer to create the various operating system drivers and for the software developers to properly hook to those drivers. Adobe does not follow this standardized method of hardware to software integration.
The one way I have found that seems to work on my WinXP Pro SP3 Core 2 Duo with 4 gigabytes of memory is as follows. Under the Tools menu should be a Cache submenu which contains a purge "your folder." Purge the folder and let the computer rebuild it. Do not do anything while it is rebuilding the cache. And I mean nothing! At least on my system it seems that my switching to some other program in the middle of the cache building (which contains the thumbnails) upsets Bridge which does not like not having full unfettered access to the graphics card or its drivers during the cache building.
Perhaps this works with CS5 or not. I do not plan on upgrading to CS5 for Adobe to laugh at my needs! Why pay them my hard earned money for them to tell me to go pound sand and that I am on my own resources. I have never been able to fully utilize Photoshop CS4 and still constantly use PS7 and PS CS2. And the corrupting of files by InDesign CS4 with no method of repairing the files makes the usage of this program laudable to a book creator. Creative Suite 2 appears to be the last fully stable software package released by Adobe. At least none of the files created by InDesign CS2 end up being recreated.
Do yourself a favor and do not attempt to create a web gallery via Bridge. There are free and shareware programs out there that handle the task much more adroitly than it does. JAlbum is a good one. Bridge's Web Gallery could have been a God send to those needing such functions. However, if you look at the coding within the templates they were each generated by a third or fourth party enterprise and the ability to manipulate them is entirely out of the reach of even the most accomplished HTML coder. And Dreamweaver laughs at the template files—not understanding the concepts used to build or enact them. And I have to yet to find any tutorials on how to create a set of files to be used as my own web gallery template.
One of the most frustrating aspects is that the majority of hard core Web Gallery programs now utilize XML files significantly. Bridge does not allow you to generate such a file containing the full spectrum of available tags that an image file can contain. Adobe's adherence to metadata standards is a very good one but the usage of the intereactivity between the various packages and external software packages is non-existent. Bridge's scripts, which would be used to create a XML file, are, in this writer's opinion, as useless as crayons are to a digital artist. And with no third party individual willing to tackle them from the perspective of true usability, this will continue to be an issue.
The one saving grace of Bridge in CS2 and CS4 is the ability to embed generated metadata into the image file itself. I strongly stress the embedding of metadata into the file as the tools that can be used in Bridge to ease the task are well thought out and simple to integrate into a digital workflow. For a photographer, or a digital archivist, simply create a temporary metadata file from information entered into one file, and copy the same information to an entire directory of files. I have used this on directories containing up to 2,000 files and it worked without a flaw. External pony files are too easy to get lost and thus there goes your carefully crafted metadata compilation.
Once you do get Bridge working correctly you will soon find it replacing your Windows file manager or a third party graphical broswer. I cannot comment on the Mac but what I have seen demonstrated on the Mac is almost as useful as Bridge. When working in either InDesign or Photoshop (ver. 7, CS2 or CS4) I have Bridge up and running. I do not allow Bridge to automatically load with the operating system, preferring instead to load it when needed, as I have seen instances where it causes problems.
And yes, I both love and hate Adobe. They got me addicted to Photoshop and InDesign and keep me stringing along with promises of a greater higher. I leave my Illustrator tasks to CorelDraw which is far, far friendlier and easier to use for vector images. A vector program with no real-world scaling?

Treo 755p camera is out of focus, any suggestions how to fix?

I bought the 755p used, everything works great, but the camera photos are blurry, out of focus. I have checked the online User Guide and I can't find any adjustment or correction for this. Palm wants $199.00 minimum charge to look at the phone. Has anyone had this problem and been able to fix it somehow? Thanks for any help or suggestions. Eric, Reno, Nevada.
Post relates to: Treo 755p (Sprint)

Was the phone dropped, or immersed in water? Either of those could cause the camera to lose focus...
WyreNut
I am a Volunteer here, not employed by HP.
You too can become an HP Expert! Details HERE!
If my post has helped you, click the Kudos Thumbs up!
If it solved your issue, Click the "Accept as Solution" button so others can benefit from the question you asked!

Low-light Cameras

Hey Everyone,
As camera and sensor technology has advanced, so has the ability of digital cameras to record in lower light without an external light source. In the past if you wanted to capture a useable image in low-light conditions you would have to use flash, strobes, or in a pinch you could use hot-lights.
Sensors have really come a long way. Modern Backlit CMOS sensors allow far more light to actually reach the photosites that capture the image, and because of this the data needs far less amplification. These types of sensors should produce images with far less digital noise while shooting at higher sensitivities. Over the last couple of years I have seen cameras with much higher selectable sensitivity to light (this is called the camera’s ISO).
Another feature that’s become better-and-better over the years, which also helps out in shooting in low-light situations, is image stabilization. Basically Image stabilization shifts either the lens elements, or the sensor itself, to compensate for any movement on the part of the shooter. This really does help out while shooting in low-light.
If you really intend on shooting a lot in low-light the best thing you can do is get a camera with the above features, but also one that uses a large sensor. While most point-and-shoot cameras do a much better job in low-light than they used to, there really is no substitution for a physically large sensor of a DSLR or Compact System Camera when shooting under low light levels.
Happy Shooting,
Allan|Senior Social Media Specialist | Best Buy® Corporate
Private Message

Allan-BBY wrote:
If you really intend on shooting a lot in low-light the best thing you can do is get a camera with the above features, but also one that uses a large sensor. While most point-and-shoot cameras do a much better job in low-light than they used to, there really is no substitution for a physically large sensor of a DSLR or Compact System Camera when shooting under low light levels.
I think the biggest low-light accomplishment is how modern cameras are able to capture starlight and galaxies with the right lenses.
While sensor size is important, choosing lenses with large apertures also helps to minimize sensor noise. Look for lenses with f/2.8, f/1.8, or f/1.4 designations.
Of course you can just cheat. Nikon's SB-910 or a Quantum bare-bulb works wonders in challenging light conditions.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nikon+-+Speedlight+SB-910+Flashlight/4675495.p?id=1218505325342&skuId=46...
Note, many compact cameras are now shipping with larger sensors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8dVE9gu96A

T3i won't AF in low light NIGHTCLUBS anymore (using 550 ex)

I do nightclub photography and I've had my t3i for about 2 years now and I use the 550 ex. Recently the red light doesn't blink when I try to get a focus in low light using the kit lens.
I know the red light does work because I used it with a trigger and I've put the flash on a 7D and it works fine. In order to get a focus now in low light, I have to use a secondary video light for the camera to focus. The camera's AF works fine in regular light and in dim light- just not in a dark nightclub (but it used to).
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Check to see if Focus Assist with External Flash has been turned off or not.
Weekend Travelers Blog | Eastern Sierra Fall Color Guide

IPhone 4s low light blurry photos

All the pictures I take in low light settings are extremely blurry, sort of like foggy. Is this happening to any of you guys? I allow it to focus, but ALL of them come out blurry.

They did not exchange it. From what the genius told me is that HDR was on during low light situations and should be on. Not sure if it's BS or not. He said the 4S processes images differently because of the 5 lens, etc...
I never had this problem with the iPhone 4 though. I left HDR on all the time and thought it automatically turned it off during low light situations?
I havent tried anything since upgrading to 5.01 so I need to try taking low light pix.

Ipod touch 4g camera looks..Grainy/static/fuzzy/blurry in low light

i got a brand new 32gb ipod touch and the picture is terrible in low light but outside its ok, i was in my room with my moms 3rd generation iphone and my 4th generation ipod and her iphone had better quality when i took a picture of my poster, mine looked grainy and hers was just dark, any one know if this is supposed to be like this?

There are several (hundred?) apps that can help the pic look better by adding more light to pics you have already taken. photoshop and camera flash come to mind. There are many more.

Why is text become blurry and out of focus?

Why is text become blurry and out of focus?

I am confused what device you are talking about. You question is here in the Using iPhone section, but it is marked for your MacBook Pro running iOS 6? If you are talking about an iPhone and you never update your profile to say you are running iOS 7, I would blame the paralax feature that slightly zooms into your picture, making certain low-res photos look extra blurry. Hope this helps.

Movie poster Artwork Out-of-Focus and blurry?

Is anyone having a problem with movie poster artwork imported into itunes (added in the get info menu area for artwork) that now appears "blurry" or "out-of focus" in cover flow, etc. and the synced version in appletv. This happened right after upgrading to 8.0.1. My previous movie posters are just fine that were imported "prior" to upgrading to itunes 8? What gives? They are somehow blurry or low-res?

I downloaded photos into iphoto
From where? Again, what are typical pixel dimensions of those photos that show blurry, i.e. how small are they?
OT

Blurry, out of focus, grainy low light photos Noki...

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for