OT: Free Shooting in Low Light Lecture

Howdy,
For those of you in the Los Angeles/Hollywood area tonight (November 8, 2006) I will be giving a free lecture on shooting in low light situations at Moviola starting at 7:00 p.m. At the break I'll be more than happy to answer all of your Aperture & photography questions
There will be two other speakers covering photography working non-destructively and the bitmap photograph.
victor

It's unlikely you have an issue. What you're experiencing is not enough light hitting the sensor from a very small lens, while moving that lens in low light. It's the limitations of the hardware.

Similar Messages

My camera acts as it is shooting in low light, but it is middle of the day.

Camera opens normally, then acts like I am shooting in low light. Tried power down, no improvement.

Sounds like a hardware failure. Make an appointment at the genius bar of your local Apple Store. There is no magic that can fix a hardware failure.

5D Mark 3 Low Light Images = really slow!!!

Hello,
I've got a rather odd problem. When shooting in low light (think pitch black, lightning shots etc) the 5d mark iii takes forever to display the image on the preview screen. It takes up to a minute or more and I can see the red light (indicating the camera is busy writing?) flickering the whole time. Thinking this was a memory card issue, I switched over to the SD Card slot (I was shooting CF before) and encountered the same issue. I'm using San Disk Extreme (30MBPS) CF Card and Extreme (45MBPS) SD Card.
Are these cards not fast enough for what I'm doing? I'm shooting in RAW + JPEG, writing to only one card.
I thought it was a camera defect, but I talked to a friend of mine who had just bought his Mark iii and he had the same complaint.
Anyone else encountering this problem or did we just get a bad batch?
Any light you can shed on this issue would be greatly appreciated.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

I swore when I read this the second time I saw something about the screen flickering, not the read light. Seems I'm losing it.
I use the Lightroom noise tool for light noise reduction of everyday type photos. But if I'm doing something that needs a lot of work - HDR, photochopping, or just really high ISO, I use Imagenomics Noiseware. It can be a bit heavy, but I usually just feather in a NR layer overtop of my normal image(s) accordingly. It does really well on low key images, getting a uniform Black.

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

Shooting in very low light

I am experimenting with night-shooting, and there is a tree in my yard that I would very much like to photograph. There is a porch light on it, and I can see it very well. I have learned about 'bulb' shooting in manual mode, and have used it in other low-light situations, but for some reason I can't get the camera to fire. It focuses and then the square in the view-finder turns red, rather than green. I think it's really important to note that I can see this tree just fine. So why can't my camera?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Use low ISO values to reduce noise. You can perform noise reduction with some computer software (my favorite is Noiseware Pro by Imagenomic.) But keep in mind that noise reduction in software also has the side-effect of softening the image (and if you go too far it looks like people have "plastic" skin.)
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Tips for avoiding "noisy" images in low-light

Hi all,
I noticed that there are a lot of users here who are complaining of noisy images especially in low-light. I'm not a professional photographer or anything but I have been playing a lot with the camera of my Xperia Z1 and I did have noisy images also at first.
Here is my tip: Use these settings:
Go to Manual Mode.
Shoot in either 8MP 4:3 or 16:9 (don't worry about not making use of the 20MP, because its still doing oversampling to improve the quality of the 8MP image by making use of the whole 20MP sensor).
Set Stabilizer to off
ISO to Auto (if you prefer more detailed images, set ISO to a lower value but take note of the exposure of the image and that there is a chance of motion blur due to the longer shutter speed necessary to capture low light at low ISO)
WB Auto (or your preference).
With the setting I use above, I've seen improvements on low-light capability (indoors, artificial lighting, or night outdoor scene for example) and quality of my camera pictures. Note though that this will not be applicable for extreme low-light. Its very normal to capture really noisy images when shooting in extreme low-light (even my dedicated compact camera has troubles too).
Here is my theory why its taking noisy images by default. In Superior Auto, I analyzed the EXIF data of the pictures I've shot. It seems that Superior Auto is really excessive in bumping up the ISO (thus resulting in more noisy images) to compensate for having a faster shutter speed (reduced motion blur). Thus what you get is a noisy image that is bright and freezes the motion. For example, test it out that in Superior Auto, even minute movements of the phone will trigger the Sports Mode (running man icon near the button) prioritizing a faster shutter speed at the cost of a higher ISO.
Another reason I have for turning off the Stabilizer in Manual Mode is the same. In contrast to Steady Shot used in recording movies (sensor based shift to compensate for handshake movements), I think the Stabilizer option basically just bumps up the ISO also to compensate for handshake movements. I"m not entirely 100% sure but so far, I've been satisfied with taking images with the Stabilizer Off.
Please feel free to test it out and report the results if there have been improvements. I'm still testing it out too! One of the things I wish for Sony to put in the Camera App are just these 3 things:
1.) Holding Shutter Key will open the Camera app with the LAST CONFIGURED SETTINGS
2.) Maximum ISO can be set in Manual Mode
3.) Scene AUTO mode for Manual Mode (I know it might be redundant but it would be nice to have Auto mode for 4:3 orientation images).
Again, hope to hear from others what are their settings or if they notice any improvements in images captured.
Thanks!

Hi, there is a FAQ related to this topic.
http://talk.sonymobile.com/t5/FAQ/Capture-better-photos-in-low-light-conditions/m-p/395397#U395397
Don't forget to mark correct answer as Accepted Solution.
If you find the post helpful, press Kudos.

Correcting for low lighting using FCP

Hi,
I am trying to correct for low lighting conditions of a some scenes I shot using an XL2 MiniDV Camera. Any suggestions? The scenes were shot in 24P 16:9 at 1/48.
Best,
Gary

for what it's worth, i've had pretty satisfactory results with a combination of Shadow Highlight from Lyric Media...
(FREE at - http://www.lyric.com/fcp-plugins/index.htm#shadow)...
...and then rescue the grainy blacks with Black Restore from Too Much Too Soon...
(FREE at - http://www.mattias.nu/plugins/)...
Just my input.

Settings Suggestions (Low Light Performance)

For about a month once I year I do some photography work, primarily portrait type photos, (at a local amusement park for their halloween event) so everything is done typically at dusk and after dark under a lot of special effects lighting. For the last couple years I used my Canon Rebel T3 with a Canon 50mm 1.8 lens, recently I aquired the 1.4 version. After getting the 1.4 I'm considering using my Canon 50D as well for this years run. I'm just seeking advice on how to achieve less noise perhaps? For both bodies? Rebel seems noisy in low light sometimes, I've managed some nice results last year with the help of a external flash on it but I don't like blinding my coworkers working the event... so there's a bit of work going into my photos post production sort to speak before sharing the images. I never been to sure as to what settings to use, I primarily just shoot in either TV or AV mode. It would be an all new experience for my 50D as I usually take it to my local zoos to take pics because I use my 28-300mm lens on it, so any advice is appreciated!
I am considering buying a 6D, or a Nikon in the future but for now I'm just settling with what I got.

If money were no object, a 1Dx and a Canon EF 50mm f1. But seriously buying a 6D, or a brand-N, is not going to help.
At least not much more than what you already have. BTW, the 50mm f1.4 you did aquire is only 1/2 stop faster than the 50mm f1.8 you already had. Not a deal maker!
I love shooting at night and at dusk. You can get some truely interesting photographs. My best advice is shoot. Yes, shoot a lot. Because experience is the best teacher. No body here can tell you what settings to use. They have not seen the venue!
Sometimes Tv will work and sometimes Av will. Even P will at times. I would avise you to stay away from the 'fully automatic' choices, however. The best advise is learn your equipment. Go to the Mall and shoot. Go to a park. Try the Zoo after dark. Any place to get the experience. But shoot!
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

6D low light video

Hello,
I'm trying to shoot video in low light and I'm getting some extra hue and contrast. When I shoot stills, what I see on the screen is what I see on my computer. When I flip over to video (with out changing ISO or WB settings) the images are darker and have a green hue.
I need what I'm seeing on the screen of the camera to be what I see on my computer monitor after I download of the card.
Any ideas?
Current setting: Exp 1/30, ISO 8000, WB 3200, f-stop 2.8
What I've tried: IPB and All-I compression, different SD cards rated for different speeds, formatting the card with the camera, and shrinking still images to 1920X1280 - Same results ever case

RobertTheFat wrote:
Skirball wrote:
I don't know about you, but my stills (RAW) are always darker than they are on my camera (6D); which is a jpg and might be part of the source. It wasn't near as noticable on my 450D. I just learned to adapt my eye and I check my histogram anyway. But I'd say the actual image looks about a 1/2 stop darker on my computer than the camera. I don't think it's abnormal to have small differences between the camera screen and computer. THere are too many variables to deal with to be consistent.
The most obvious explanation for that phenomenon (which means that you've probably already considered it and ruled it out) is that you've turned up the brightness of the camera's display screen. That setting is independent of all else, and it's easy to turn it up when the ambient light is high and then later forget that you did it. And maybe you didn't have the screen turned up as high on your 450D.
Also, of course, even a RAW image gets darker if subjected to any white balance correction (because that correction can only subtract, not add, light). I'd expect the screen to display the corrected image, but conceivably it doesn't.
Yes, that was the first thing that crossed my mind, but not just that the setting was turned up, but that the display is simply brighter. Although my old 450D seemed to be closer to the actual exposure it was terrible in the shadows. Things would look black on the camera but I'd still have detail on the actual photo.
I didn't bother looking for a brightness setting on my 6D for several reasons. 1) the brightness is really nice when you're out in bright sunlight; 2) I recognize there are far too many variables to expect any consistency between a small jpg with settings applied on a 3" backlit LCD to a full sized RAW file on a calibrated IPS monitor in a dim room; 3) I check my historgram constantly, I never trust what I see on the image, it's just a preview to get you in the ballpark; and 4) the IQ and recovery on the 6D is so good that I know if the image looks decent on the camera then I'll be able to make it work in post.

Best camera for low light and sports

have the sx200is
looking for a newer camera for sports and low light shots

The challenge with sports is that you are REALLY pushing the camera gear to it's limits. Fast action requires fast shutter speeds. But fast shutter speeds demand a lot of light and only outdoor games played during the daytime have that. Indoor games or games played under field lighting at night generally do not have the kind of lighting needed to shoot with fast shutter speeds -- not the kind of shutter speeds needed to freeze action. So this ends up demanding a camera with excellent ISO performance and lenses with very low focal ratios so they can collect a LOT more light when the shutter is open. This gear is expensive.
You will want to consider a reasonable budget depending on what you can afford and the needs of the specific sports.
Are these indoor or outdoor sports? If outdoors, are these played during the day or are they night games?
The "best" camera for sports and low light is the EOS-1D X. It has phenominal low-light performance, has an amazing focus system, and can shoot at 12 frames per second. But it's about $6800 for the "body only" and then you still need lenses. I'm guessing this is probably not what you had in mind. But if money were not a constraint... this would be the one to go for.
The 5D III is another amazing camera for low light performance and and also has an amazing focusing system (largely the same as the 1D X) can shoot at 6 frames per second, and only costs $3500... again, that's the "body only". Still probably not what you had in mind.
The 70D has an extremely good focus system (though not as good as the 5D III and 1D X), not quite as good as low light (but pretty good and much better than a point & shoot camera) and shoots at 7 frames per second (1 fps faster than 5D III) and it only costs $1200 for the body only.
The T5i will be noticeably less expensive than the 70D... a good (but not extremely good) focusing system and 5 frames per second, but the body and 1 kit lens combined is about $850 but that wont a lens suitable for use shooting sports so you'll still need to invest in more appropriate lenses.
When shooting action photography in low light, what you _really_ want is a lens that can collect a lot more light than the average lens for that very brief moment when the shutter is open. Such a lens can allow you to use a faster shutter speed to help freeze those action shots. But *which* lens you use depends on the sport.
For low-light sports, these would ideally be f/2.8 zoom lenses... but f/2.8 zoom lenses are not cheap. Canon's EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM (ideal for most indoor sports and outdoor sports IF the action is happening close to you) is about $2500. Sigma's lens is about half that price. But if you're covering action on a large athletic field and the players are far away, they'll still be small. Sigma makes a 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom for sports... for the low low price of only $3600.
Scott Kelby does a video to talk about sports photography and he discusses the equipment used and why... and basically says if you want the gear for shooting sports, you basically need a suitcase full of money.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Inaccurate White Balance Of 808 In Low Light - Any...

I find the white balance and exposure of the Pureview 808 in indoor low light shots to be erratic, mostly inaccurate in most shooting modes. Although the predecessor N8 produces a noisier and darker image that is lacking in clarity (in low light), I find its white balance to be more accurate than the Pureview 808.
In low to dim lighting, the white balance on the Pureview 808 always appear to be cooler than actual conditions apart from the image being slightly over-exposed.
Below are my observations on the Pureview 808 (only in low light):-
1) In "Scenes", Night mode will produce an image that is slightly brighter than actual conditions, slightly overexposed. White balance is off.
2) In "Creative", Auto, Incandescent and Fluorescent modes, - as above.
3) In "Creative", Sunny and Cloudy modes will produce an image that is truer to actual conditions. White balance is more accurate in these modes.
The N8 in Night mode (with white balance in Auto) produces a more accurate white balance than the Pureview 808, though the image suffers from noise and is slightly under-exposed.
Not exactly a criticism of the Pureview 808 as the overall image quality in low light at high ISO levels is still pretty remarkable with excellent clarity and low levels of noise. It's just the minor issue in the white balance which seems to be always off in low light.
In good light, bright sunny conditions outdoors, no issues.
For those who own the Pureview 808, may I ask how do you cope with this slight anomaly in the Pureview 808? Will there be software update in future to address this flaw?
Any information would be appreciated.

It is unfortunate that sample images cannot be posted here. I have some sample images which not only demonstrate the inaccurate white balance of the Pureview 808 in low light but also the erratic exposure which seems to render an image in low lighting conditions to appear brighter than what it is in real life, an over-exposed image.
Below is the link to CNET's review which also highlights the inaccurate white balance of the 808.
http://asia.cnet.com/shootout-nokia-808-pureview-vs-panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx5-62216561.htm

FILMING WITH REBELT31, OPTIONS FOR RECORDING IN LOW LIGHT.

Hi there everyone. My question is that I want to know about a lenses that supports me good definition and quality in low light conditions. I am recording with a Rebel t3i. Thanks in advance.

bebefle_89 wrote:
This is my first DSLR and I am recording weddings and parties. For the nature of these events, most of them have low light conditions. I also need advice of a gadget to record everything without changing SD cards. Thanks.
The solution is a bigger (higher capacity) SD card. =) They go up to 64gb and 128gb now which should provide A LOT of recording capacity.
bebefle_89 wrote:
At the time, I've been working just with the 18-55 (the one that comes with the camera package), but I need an aditional lense because this lense I have, is graining all my videos because of the adjustment of ISO.
How much do you understand about f-stops, shutter speed, and ISO? What exposure settings are you using now for your videos? In short, you need a lens that can open up to a larger aperture (such as f/1.8, f1.4 or f1.2).
Here are some guides that will be helpful in explaining these concepts for you:
http://www.exposureguide.com/exposure.htm
http://www.makethephoto.com/articles/how-to-make-the-jump-from-automatic-shooting-to-manual-shooting

IPhone Camera - distorted vertical stripe in low light

My iPhone 5 camera (on rear side) recently started showing a distorted vertical stripe down the left side of the screen in low light. It starts as a yellowish stripe, and as the light gets lower, it turns more distorted with pinks and blues (see attached screenshot). In sunlight outdoors, there is no visible stripe. Any ideas on
what can be done about this?
Message was edited by: met_fan

Hi there met_fan,
You may find the troubleshooting steps in the article below helpful.
iPhone: Hardware troubleshooting
http://support.apple.com/kb/ts2802
Camera isn't functioning or has undesired image quality
If the screen shows a closed lens or black image, force quit the Camera app.
If you do not see the Camera app on the Home screen, try searching for it in Spotlight. If the camera does not show up in the search, check to make sure that Restrictions are not turned on by tappingSettings > General > Restrictions.
Ensure the camera lens is clean and free from any obstructions. Use a microfiber polishing cloth to clean the lens.
Cases can interfere with the camera and the flash. Try gently cleaning the lens with a clean dry cloth or removing the case if you see image or color-quality issues with photos.
Try turning iPhone off and then back on.
Tap to focus the camera on the subject. The image may pulse or briefly go in and out of focus as it adjusts.
Try to remain steady while focusing:
Still images: Remain steady while taking the picture. If you move too far in any direction, the camera automatically refocuses to the center.
Note: If you take a picture with iPhone turned sideways, it is automatically saved in landscape orientation.
Video: Adjust focus before you begin recording. You can also tap to readjust focus while recording. Exiting the Camera application while recording will stop recording and will save the video to the Camera Roll.
Note: Video-recording features are not available on original iPhone or iPhone 3G.
If your iPhone has a front and rear camera, try switching between them to verify if the issue persists on both.
Issue not resolved
My issue is still not resolved. What do I do next?
Contact Apple Support.
-Griff W.

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.

5D Mark III HSS Problem in Low light

We have a somewhat serious problem with our two Mark III's...or some obscure setting.
When the light level get's too low, they over expose when HSS is on. We can slow down the shutter so it turns HSS off and everthing is perfect. But, once you speed up so HSS is on, it is way over exposed (about two stops). This happens with both cameras and an ST-E3-RT, a 600EX-RT and/or a 430EX - off-camera or on. It doesn't seem to matter what ISO setting or exposure setting, once it goes below a certain light level it over exposes. We are normally around ISO 10,000, F2.8, 1/250. At this point, flash compensation has no effect, camera exposure compensation does change it but then you can't go back to regular light levels or no flash without switching it back. Another hint is that I can change the off-camera 600EX-RT compensation on the flash itself and that will help. But again, if it goes back to regular flash, it'll be too dark.
So, there is a clear difference in exposure between HSS and regular, or no flash at low light levels.
We've used this method with the original 5D and the 5D Mark II and all was fine. This is new with the Mark III.
It is possible we have some obscure setting incorrect...hopefully. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

mortontd wrote:
We have a somewhat serious problem with our two Mark III's...or some obscure setting.
When the light level get's too low, they over expose when HSS is on. We can slow down the shutter so it turns HSS off and everthing is perfect. But, once you speed up so HSS is on, it is way over exposed (about two stops). This happens with both cameras and an ST-E3-RT, a 600EX-RT and/or a 430EX - off-camera or on. It doesn't seem to matter what ISO setting or exposure setting, once it goes below a certain light level it over exposes. We are normally around ISO 10,000, F2.8, 1/250. At this point, flash compensation has no effect, camera exposure compensation does change it but then you can't go back to regular light levels or no flash without switching it back. Another hint is that I can change the off-camera 600EX-RT compensation on the flash itself and that will help. But again, if it goes back to regular flash, it'll be too dark.
So, there is a clear difference in exposure between HSS and regular, or no flash at low light levels.
We've used this method with the original 5D and the 5D Mark II and all was fine. This is new with the Mark III.
It is possible we have some obscure setting incorrect...hopefully. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
There's definitely something wonky about this situation. If anything, the photo should be DARKER when using HSS. And flash compensation has no effect, but exposure compensation does? That doesn't make much sense with regard to the flash power. Exposure compensation should have no effect on the flash at all if you're shooting in Av mode.
Try shooting in manual, and do a "factory reset" of your camera body and reset all custom functions.

OT: Free Shooting in Low Light Lecture

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for