Problem taking pics in low light/deep dives

Kirgan · Jan 1, 2008

Hello,

I have a Canon A620 camera in a Canon housing & no strobes. I have always had some focusing issues, which at times is frustrating and can cause me to miss a shot, but at least I have some methods to try to work around it. Of course that is not the point of this post

The problem I am having with my A620 that I have not been able to work around is that I have problems taking pictures in low light, bad viz and/or deep dives with this camera.

For instance, when wreck diving on weekends around Miami (where I live) and the Keys, many times there is not a lot of natural light (due to depth, viz, cloudy day or a combination). If I want to take a picture of the wreck or anything outside of flash range, my pictures always either end up way to dark (even with an f-stop of 2.8 and shutter speed of 1/60). The few that came out decent happen to be on really good viz days with lots of sunlight. However, those types of conditions haven't been the norm for me over the last year or so.

If I boost up ISO then my pics get way to grainy and loose too much detail for my taste. I notice degradation even just going up to ISO 100. Anything above that is really bad in my opinion - unless there is plenty of light, which of course if there was I wouldn't need to increase the ISO. So right now, I either take grainy pics or pics that are way to dark in these situations.

I have been investigating other cameras to try to find one that can do much better job at low light levels without going to a DSLR. BTW, I do have a DSLR for top side pics, but I am not currently willing to spend a couple of grand on a housing for that camera or take the chance of a flood with my DSLR. I read that the Fuji F-31D is the best compact camera for low light levels with the least amount of noise and distortion. I also read that it does better at higher ISO levels than any other compact camera on the market. I am hoping if I buy it, I can finally get some decent pictures in low light.

Can anyone confirm what I have heard about the F-31D? Or do you know of a non DSLR camera that is better? Manual controls is a must. RAW is plus, but not required - especially if there is a firmware hack like on the Canon's to allow RAW anyway. : )

Thanks,

--Mike

Gilligan · Jan 1, 2008

This is a common problem when using ambient light. The solution for a JPEG camera is to go with higher ISO settings along with using calibrated (custom) white balance. Shutter speeds lower than 1/80 will often result in a blurred photo if anything is moving. I have found that ISO 200 is sufficient but I am usually in clear waters. The Helicon Filter does a good job with digital noise.

Firmware hacks are HERE

Free Helicon digital noise reduction program is HERE

bigfrog23 · Jan 1, 2008

one suggestion in use a tripod i have done this several time works well but you might want to get a SCUBA Sherpa to carry it around for you. i modified the feet on the tripod so that each one has a molded weight that ways 2LBS for a total of 6LBS this help hold the rig down this works well with longer shutter speed.

pakman · Jan 1, 2008

Kirgan:
If I boost up ISO then my pics get way to grainy and loose too much detail for my taste. I notice degradation even just going up to ISO 100. Anything above that is really bad in my opinion - unless there is plenty of light, which of course if there was I wouldn't need to increase the ISO. So right now, I either take grainy pics or pics that are way to dark in these situations.

I have been investigating other cameras to try to find one that can do much better job at low light levels without going to a DSLR. BTW, I do have a DSLR for top side pics, but I am not currently willing to spend a couple of grand on a housing for that camera or take the chance of a flood with my DSLR. I read that the Fuji F-31D is the best compact camera for low light levels with the least amount of noise and distortion. I also read that it does better at higher ISO levels than any other compact camera on the market. I am hoping if I buy it, I can finally get some decent pictures in low light.

Can anyone confirm what I have heard about the F-31D? Or do you know of a non DSLR camera that is better? Manual controls is a must. RAW is plus, but not required - especially if there is a firmware hack like on the Canon's to allow RAW anyway. : )

Thanks,

--Mike

I've got a Fuji F30 (not the F31fd). I've played around with it a few times u/w. The high ISO is pretty darn good for a P&S. But the AF can be a bit frustrating in low light. Also note the Fuji's has aperture priority or shutter priority controls, but not full manual...

PerroneFord · Jan 2, 2008

There are numerous ways to dance around this, but the answer is the same as with anything topside. You see those guys with the big lenses and huge strobes? They probably didn't want to drop all that money either... More glass lets in more light. More light equals less noise.

Right tools for the job.

spt29970 · Jan 2, 2008

PerroneFord:
There are numerous ways to dance around this, but the answer is the same as with anything topside. You see those guys with the big lenses and huge strobes? They probably didn't want to drop all that money either... More glass lets in more light. More light equals less noise.

Right tools for the job.

Big glass is only part of the equation. The size of the sensor also matters. Bigger photosites equals less noise. One of reasons that full frame sensors are so desirable is that each photosite is physically bigger. It is also why the megapixels wars have become somewhat misguided. If you leave the sensor dimensions constant and increase the number of pixels, the noise per pixel increases. For this reason, most 10Mpixel point and shoot cameras do not have better images than 5Mpixel predecessors. If you want to do low light imaging, there is no substitute for a large lens combined with a large sensor.

Peter_C · Jan 2, 2008

Might I suggest buying a 10 watt HID or even better a 21 watter. Shine the light on the subject then take the picture. Works with DSLR's, P&S cameras, and video cameras. The HID will allow the camera to focus and supply ambient light. The other alternative is to purchase a tray and arm setup, fiber optic cord, and strobe with a target light.

For me the HID changed the way I dove and drastically improved even a well lite dive by making it brighter. Seeing into the dark crevices makes creature appear you will never see without a bright light.

Warren_L · Jan 2, 2008

Welcome to my world.

This is a common problem with this sort of photography. The tips mentioned so far are all good - but will really only go so far. Increasing the ISO to the highest acceptable setting, making sure you have the aperature as wide open as possible, and going as slow as practical on the shutter speed is really all that you can do. With some of the stuff around here, I sometimes shoot as slow as 1/8 sec. It's easier to do in water than out of the water. The issue is if there is anything moving in your frame (like fish or divers) they may get some motion blurring. Tripods will work as well, but it can be slow and cumbersome to get set up, and getting a lot of different shots at a particular site may be difficult.

For point and shoot cameras, there's not much else you can do. For dSLRs, you can get a lens that will open up wider (providing it will work with your housing and port system). The HID works to an extent, although I find that it creates a beam through the image - giving that star wars effect.

Using a camera with good high ISO quality will help too, although this can be difficult. I have a Nikon D3 on order, which is great for higher ISO shooting, however, the price tag may make this prohibitive.

Kirgan:
Hello,

I have a Canon A620 camera in a Canon housing & no strobes. I have always had some focusing issues, which at times is frustrating and can cause me to miss a shot, but at least I have some methods to try to work around it. Of course that is not the point of this post

The problem I am having with my A620 that I have not been able to work around is that I have problems taking pictures in low light, bad viz and/or deep dives with this camera.

For instance, when wreck diving on weekends around Miami (where I live) and the Keys, many times there is not a lot of natural light (due to depth, viz, cloudy day or a combination). If I want to take a picture of the wreck or anything outside of flash range, my pictures always either end up way to dark (even with an f-stop of 2.8 and shutter speed of 1/60). The few that came out decent happen to be on really good viz days with lots of sunlight. However, those types of conditions haven't been the norm for me over the last year or so.

If I boost up ISO then my pics get way to grainy and loose too much detail for my taste. I notice degradation even just going up to ISO 100. Anything above that is really bad in my opinion - unless there is plenty of light, which of course if there was I wouldn't need to increase the ISO. So right now, I either take grainy pics or pics that are way to dark in these situations.

I have been investigating other cameras to try to find one that can do much better job at low light levels without going to a DSLR. BTW, I do have a DSLR for top side pics, but I am not currently willing to spend a couple of grand on a housing for that camera or take the chance of a flood with my DSLR. I read that the Fuji F-31D is the best compact camera for low light levels with the least amount of noise and distortion. I also read that it does better at higher ISO levels than any other compact camera on the market. I am hoping if I buy it, I can finally get some decent pictures in low light.

Can anyone confirm what I have heard about the F-31D? Or do you know of a non DSLR camera that is better? Manual controls is a must. RAW is plus, but not required - especially if there is a firmware hack like on the Canon's to allow RAW anyway. : )

Thanks,

--Mike

Choyster · Jan 2, 2008

How effective is shining an underwater flashlight (torch) on a subject versus buying a dedicated strobe? Just starting out with UW photography myself and wondering if my Princeton Tec Shockwave LED is going to help or if I should just step up and buy a strobe.

Larry C · Jan 2, 2008

Choyster, any light is better than no light, but there is a disadvantage to using a steady beam. The strobe will fire briefly, for part of the time the shutter is open. This effectively stops the action. If your hand moves a little or your subject moves a little, you might not have a really crisp picture but it's usually workable if the focus was OK. I tried the divelight trick when I first got my camera. I got some interesting effects. Many overlit or underlit pictures and most of them blurred. 90% of the problems went away when I got my first strobe (and learned how to use it). If you have a really strong light you could stop the lens way down and shoot a really fast shutter and probably get some pretty good macros, but then you'll have to deal with holding the camera in one hand and lighting with the other. A quality strobe will make you a much better photographer.

Problem taking pics in low light/deep dives

Please register or login

Kirgan

Registered

Gilligan

Contributor

bigfrog23

Guest

pakman

Contributor

PerroneFord

Contributor

spt29970

Contributor

Peter_C

Contributor

Warren_L

Contributor

Choyster

Contributor

Larry C

Contributor

Similar threads