Nikon D40 help.

[Drewpoo]

I just bought my D40 yesterday with the 18-55 kit lens. I'm having trouble choosing the settings i want to have crisp photos in low-light without using flash. Is there any way to accomplish this without having to use flash with this lens ?


And what are good settings to choose in general just to have crisper photos in any lighting ?

[wulf]

You might be asking the impossible. If the light is low, it needs a slower shutter speed which is more susceptible to motion blur from your hands shaking as you take the picture. A tripod or something else to rest the camera on would help.

Perhaps you could show us one of the pictures and the key settings that the camera used (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length)?

If that sounds too complex, we can break it down into smaller steps. If you haven't used an SLR type camera before, the first few days can seem quite overwhelming (... thinks back to late December :D ).

Wulf

[jeffegg2]

I just bought my D40 yesterday with the 18-55 kit lens. I'm having trouble choosing the settings i want to have crisp photos in low-light without using flash. Is there any way to accomplish this without having to use flash with this lens ?


And what are good settings to choose in general just to have crisper photos in any lighting ?

For low light, you want to open your aperature as wide open as possible. (large F number). so set the cam on A setting, and rotate the knob until it is a small number.

so you will have a shutter speed that is according to this aperature. if the shutter speed is too slow, i.e. pics are blurry from hand holding cam, or things (people) moving, then the only other option you have is to increase the ISO setting. perhaps 800 or even 1200. It will degrade (make grainy) your shot, but the nikon is best of all the cams at this, so perhaps acceptable.

for any lighting? Learn to use your cam, or use off cam flash.

I belong to the strobist group in www.flickr.com. also read lighting101 at www.strobist.com for many ideas!!!

I love my D40!!!!

[ELAY]

The D40 is pretty good in low light -- your real limitation is your lens. The 18-55 just isn't a very fast lens (doesn't open up very wide). At 55mm your max aperture is f/5.6 which just doesn't give you good low-light performance.

So a couple of thoughts:

1. Buy another lens. The most economical choice is a used 50mm f/1.8 AF. You will have to manually focus, but you get up to three additional stops of aperture out of it (with each stop doubling the amount of light the sensor sees).

2. Shoot toward the 18 mm end of the lens. Depending how far in this direction you go, this gives you one stop and a bit of extra sensitivity. This isn't always feasible, but remember that the more you zoom in, the smaller your max aperture will be.

3. Use a tripod or other stabilizer for the camera, so you can get slower shutter speeds (not always possible).

4. Boost ISO as suggested up higher.

EL

[kirbinster]

I have the same camera and an invaluable resource for me was Ken Rockwells' D40 "manual" Its not really a manual, rather an explanation of all the controls on the camera, what they do for you in the real world and how he recommends setting them. Check it out HERE (http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/users-guide/index.htm)

[wulf]

For low light, you want to open your aperature as wide open as possible. (large F number). so set the cam on A setting, and rotate the knob until it is a small number.
The only problem with that is that, for many lenses, the widest aperture is not as sharp as two or three stops in. When you are on the relatively slow kit lens, that problem is even worse in low light - on my manual focus lens I can be stopped down to f/4 and still getting more light than the lowest possible setting on the kit lens!

As a lateral solution, is there anyway you can increase the light available on your subject? As mentioned above, some details of what you are trying to shoot and sample shots would help.

Wulf

[jdepould]

The 50 f/1.8D is great stopped down to 2.8, just has pretty shallow depth of field.

Is there a particular reason you're trying to avoid using flash? Do you have an external flash unit or just the pop-up one that's on the camera?

[Drewpoo]

Just the flash that came standard with the camera. And when i'm outdoors trying to take pictures of things at night, esp, in the city, the flash doesn't work out too well.


What's a good fast lens for low-light situations that would be under 300 or so ?

[kirbinster]

The Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 can be had for about $110 from several of the normal online places (B&H, J&R, etc..). As for flash, it won't do much for you outside at any distance. I always laugh when I am at a baseball or basketball game and see all the flashes popping in the stands. Do people really think that little flash is going to put any light on the players that are 500 feet away? Its even funnier when you watch people taking pictures of fireworks and they are using flash. Most flashes have a range of 6 to 12 feet, maybe a little more for a really big unit. Bottom line, at night outdoor you need a fast lens, a long exposure and maybe a tripod too.

Just practice and it will come.

[Drewpoo]

http://wheresneek.com/images/today/IMG_4907.JPG


So what would be a decent lens to get something to that effect out of a night time picture ? No tripod was used here and so i'm assuming that a fast lens would be needed?

[kirbinster]

If you did not take it how can you be sure no tripod was used? Perhaps they just sat the camera on the roof of a car across the street. Anyhow, if you have someway of stabilizing the camera to take a long exposure of something like this you don't really need a fast lens - the kit lens will work just fine. What you need the fast lens for is if there is movement in what you are taking a picture of.

[ELAY]

There are circumstances where a fast lens might allow you take a shot like this one without a tripod -- really depends how dark it was and how steady the hand is.

But Kirbinster is right -- if you are after shooting night scenes, then your kit lens will work fine. No matter what you use, it likely is not going to work much without stabilizing, and once you get out your tripod, or set your camera on a rail or whatever, any lens will work OK.

EL

[Drewpoo]

What's a decent wide-angle lens for the d40 for under about 500 dollars ? I've been searching but many of the good ones run for 900+ or so.

[jdepould]

Tokina 12-24 f/4

[ELAY]

But with the Tokina you are into the perennial problem with the D40 -- no autofocus. It may not be that critical with a wide angle lens, but it can be a hindrance.

The Sigma 10-20 HSM is in the same price range ($499 at B&H), and gives you autofocus. There are a couple of members on here who quite like theirs.

Let me say say, though, that your kit lens does take you reasonably wide at 18mm and is actually not a bad wide angle performer. Have a look over in Landscape at some of the shots from my Charlevoix trip to get a sense of what it can do.

EL

[jdepould]

Bah, I forgot about that. :(

[wulf]

Let me say say, though, that your kit lens does take you reasonably wide at 18mm and is actually not a bad wide angle performer. Have a look over in Landscape at some of the shots from my Charlevoix trip to get a sense of what it can do.
Were all those kit lens shots? If so, they provide an excellent illustration of that fact that if you can't get a decent shot out of the kit lens, the problem may not be that you need to buy more equipment - you have some superb pictures there.

Wulf

[ELAY]

Yeah, all with the kit, mostly zoomed out to 18.

I had recently bought a second hand 24-85 AFS sort of to be a general walkaround. Nice lens, but I actually found that it doesn't get me wide enough and I ended up with the kit on for most of the time during the trip.

(Doesn't stop me from wanting something like the Sigma 10-20 though.)

EL