Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

D7200 lenses for family pictures in low light and action

dslr lenses family pictures low light and action

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1
murushn

murushn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag

Hello,

 

I recently bought a D7200 with 18-55 VRII kit and bought separately a Nikon 35mm 1.8D lenses, happy with 35mm for blurring and taking sharp pictures within its range and with an external flash 18-55mm lens pictures taken inside home came very good, sharp and well lit.

 

I find lacking capability when shooting pictures with 18-55mm stage dance performance, when the light is well lit with alternating colored lights. Tried with manual and shutter speed priority (1/60~1/250) with ISO range 1600~4500 pictures are not sharp, they are bright, not crisp and they seem like taken from a mobile. Tried with 35mm couldn't zoom much to cover artists, pictures are better than 18-55mm and can see clear faces frozen in action (1/160~1/400 f2~f3 ISO-1600).

 

Tested with Auto white balance and home setting, home/indoor white balance results more yellow color of light when source is lit by more lights.

 

Need your expert advice and suggestion for try outs with different setting and lenses (fast primes/wide-zoom either D or Full frame lenses) which covers my photo interests (family, kids in action, candid pictures).

 

Thanks,

SS.



#2
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

Posting one or more of the shots would definitely help, but I am guessing from the settings you posted that you are seeing movement in the subjects.  Dancers can be as active as any athlete so you have to shoot fast enough (shutter speed) to stop their movement.  I would suggest that 1/500 would be the minimum shutter speed to stop the movement and, depending on the dancer or dancers, you might need to go faster.  I normally shoot sports (which adds balls and bats and sticks that can move faster than the people) and I have even seen some motion blur (of ball for example) at 1/2000 or faster.  You may have to push your ISO higher and / or go for a faster lens (like a 2.8 aperture or lower #) to get you to the shutter speed you need.  

 

I would also think you might benefit from something longer than the 18-55 to get a closer view of the dance subjects unless you are trying to grab the whole stage or you are close to the stage.  As I said at the start, posting some examples would help everyone narrow it down and provide better recommendations.  



#3
M.Beier

M.Beier

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 208 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCopenhagen

Hard to argue with TBonz knowing that he is right.

As I see it, you have 2 choices...

1) Change to FX, allowing you to go higher ISO

2) Buy SIGMA F1.8 DX glass



#4
Brian

Brian

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Country Flag

The Autofocus Nikkor 85/1.8 would give speed and reach on a 1.5x crop factor camera, runs under $500 new with USA warranty.

 

https://www.bhphotov...5mm_f_1_8G.html

 

I've bought from this company before.



#5
murushn

murushn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag

Thank you, increasing ISO Im getting faster shutter speed but quality suffers a lot without getting detail on face, I'll post pictures.

Will tamron 28-75mm f/2.8/Sigma 24-70 help using D7200 for reach and clarity.



#6
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

Any of the 24-70 range zooms with a 2.8 aperture will help with the low light and add some reach.  The D7200 should be OK up to about 6400 ISO based on what I have heard from folks who use it for sports (high school on poorly lit fields or in equally poorly lit gyms).  You might find the 85, a 135 or maybe longer would be best to get the reach you need.  Hard to say without knowing how close you can get to the stage.  While not inexpensive, the 70-200, f2.8 Nikon or Tamron are both fairly common choices for low light action.  To me, the Nikon is faster focusing, but both are nice lenses. 



#7
murushn

murushn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag

Sample picture.

Attached Thumbnails

  • DSC_1.jpg


#8
Brian

Brian

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Country Flag

Just a couple of things I've learned about shooting High-ISO,

1) Shoot uncompressed NEF, or "Lossless" uncompressed NEF. Lossy NEF will make the noise more obvious. JPEG- whatever the onboard processing does to it, I'm not sure. I prefer uncompressed RAW and post-processing for noise reduction.

2) Use SLOW SD cards. Fast cards perform more buffering, tend to be Bursty with writes, puts a strain on the DC-DC converters in the camera and can introduce noise in the form of banding. This is more obvious in my CCD cameras, but I've also noted it in the Nikon DF. I use 4x memory cards for high-ISO.



#9
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The next two f/1.8 lenses toward the long end are well worth their cost as they are quite cheap. Brian has already presented the 85, which is a marvelous tool. The 50/1.8G is no slouch either, and very cheap at under $220. https://www.bhphotov...0mm_f_1_8G.html I recommend this us vendor as well, as they are pleasant to deal with even from across the pond. 



#10
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

Murushn, how are you post processing your images. The photo you posted doesn't look especially bad except for obvious noise (both color and luminance) along with a bit of banding. And yes, it is a little soft which could be due to a number of things including your lens. Most of this can be minimized, if not eliminated in post.

 

As far as lenses go, the advice you've already received is good and I can personally vouch of one or two of the lenses mentioned. However, there are still going to be times when you need to push the ISO in order to get proper exposure no matter how fast your lenses are and, in those cases, you're likely going to end up with some noise and other artifacts that need correcting.

 

--Ron



#11
murushn

murushn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag

Thank you all, appreciate your suggestions. I was not aware about memory card speeds affecting noise it's a good info.

Attached a picture which I tried to take during a rainy day with external flash that didn't freeze the rain, but photo came out good used Nikon 35mm 1.8.

I will def. look at 85mm, also can this post be used for asking photographing tips, techniques or will a new post in diff. category be useful for all?

 

Thanks,

Subbu.

Attached Thumbnails

  • DSC_1056.jpg


#12
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

You can, of course, use this thread if you want to. A new thread with a descriptive title will, however, probably get more replies as not everybody reads new posts in old threads.



#13
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

I agree on different threads for different topics / issues.  It will have a better opportunity to be seen and it will help others down the road using the search function to find information on similar topics / issues.

 

I would have to disagree with Brian to an extent.  A slower card may indeed provide less noise - I honestly haven't tried that.  However, a slower card requires a longer write time (and longer time dumping images to your computer).  A longer write time will cause your buffer to fill up more quickly and that can significantly impact your ability to shoot action.  At a critical moment, you don't want the camera to be emptying the buffer when you need to be shooting.  I know as I have had that happen even with the fastest card available at the time on some of my non-pro bodies.  Noise is something that you are going to have to deal with shooting any action in low light.  It will show up in some images more than others.  I don't have the EXIF info handy, but I know both of these images were shot at either 6400 or 12800 ISO on my D4.  

 

JohnstonCounty.Today-4907.jpg

 

JohnstonCountyToday-7984.jpg

 

I am also sure that both were at F4 and 1/1000 or faster shutter speed.  Yes, there is noise, but the players are sharp and have sufficient detail for a decent sized print.  The background in your image is going to make the noise more visible, but I expect you can get rid of most of it in post.

 



#14
murushn

murushn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Country Flag

Yes, player is sharp and froze his movement with little noise and not more light or color bleeding which I had in my picture. Which lens you used.

 

-Subbu.



#15
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

I have a Hiroshima day - Gallery - NikonForums.com up from Hiroshima day this year. Everything is shot in low light with the 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 105/2DC and 180/2.8.

Which lens was used can be seen from the file names. The rest of the EXIF can be found by clicking on Optiona and then View EXIF properties. These are all made with the D700, which has noise levels only slightly better than the D7200 even though it is FX. I could use these long exposures since the whole ceremony is a slow and thoughtful one. I overexposed most raw files slightly and pulled them back in post to get a stronger signal and a better signal/noise ratio. 

 

Even if I am not Tom(TBonz), I am sure that as he is certain that he used f/4, he used his 200-400 super telezoom for the football photos..



#16
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

You are correct sir...but then, you usually are :)  I used my Nikon 200-400 f4 for both shots...mounted on a monopod...and Peter's (Merco_61's) gallery is an excellent gallery...As I recall they were shot with a body that doesn't have the low light capabilities of the D7200 as well...

 

The sharpness, in part, is helped by the faster shutter speed which is made possible by the ISO and aperture selected...The 200-400 isn't something that most folks will ever need (or want to pay for) but is certainly an excellent lens.  As I said earlier in the thread, if you need a longer lens I'd look into the various 70-200 range zooms with 2.8 apertures.  I've used both the Tamron and the Nikon...