Problem focusing in the dark

[kari douma]

Does anyone else have problems focusing when it is too dark? I did

about 10 weddings so far. I ALWAYS have problems on the dance

floor. I can't seem to focus well. If I have my camera (Nikon N90s

for candid's) set on auto focus, it can't find a focus when the

bride and groom are dancing, especially if they are moving or

swaying. If I set it on manual, I can't see if the focus is sharp.

Usually I take about 10 shots of the bride and groom dancing, and I

am lucky if I get 2 or 3 focused shots. The last wedding that I

did, I couldn't take a shot of the bride and groom as they were

anounced as "Mr. and Mrs." when they came into the reception. There

I stood, trying to get a focus, they were waiting for the picture,

and I couldn't get my camera to cooperate! Finally I just put down

my camera and waved them on. How embarresing! Then I asked the

Master of Reception if we could turn up the lights a little for the

first dance so I could get a couple good pictures (I explained it

was too dark) he did, RELUCTANTLY. This helped tremendously. I was

able to get the photo's I needed. Now, when I go as a guest to

weddings, I always watch the photographer to see if he/she has a

problem with this, and they don't seem to. Does anyone have any

good advise on this issue?

[johnmarkpainter]

You might consider getting a fast 35mm manual lens for those situations. That way you

can "zone Focus".

 

A wide-ish lens will give you more depth of-field. I am guessing you are shooting with a

flash? f8 will cover a lot of focus errors with a flash

 

jmp

[Jerry_]

Next time, focus on the groom's feet (dark shoes?) and then turn AF off. You will be ready. House lights up a bit helps (as you found out.) Since you didn't mention the type of flash you are using, a Nikon speedlight (SB-26 or SB-28) usually puts out a red-focus beam in darker rooms....

 

 

 

Dancing shots can be taken with a gentle tap on the groom's shoulder so he and the bride look at you, giving you a decent 3/4 shot that is not 'bouncing' to the beat of the DJ.

[carl photography]

If your flash has an autofocus-assist light -- like my SB-26 and SB-28 -- this light won't be effectively aimed when the flash is mounted on a bracket or off-camera (as it should be!).

 

I just read (in Petersen's Photographic) about a $30 focus-assist and redeye-prevention light that mounts to a camera's (or bracket's) tripod socket.

 

"Brandon's Dad"

[fotografz]

Kari, you didn't mention what lens you were using. If it is a slower maximum aperture

zoom, that can contribute to focusing difficulties in darker conditions. A 35/1.4 or 50/1.4

prime will focus a lot faster and surer than a 2.8 or 3.5 zoom simply because more light is

there for the AF sensor to work with. Most AF sensors won't even work above f/5.6.

 

Another thing is to use the center AF sensor, it is usually the most sensitive.

 

Also, ask Nikon users if there is a shoe mount transmitter for your flash that has the AF

assist beam in it like the Canon STE2. This is one of the chief advantages of the STE2 ... it

always sends the AF assist beam from the camera no matter where the flash is located.

 

In fact, an infrared transmitter with a focus assist beam can be used without any flash at

all, yet still increase speed and accuracy of available light AF work.<div></div>

[kari douma]

Thanks Marc,

Let me ask you this stupid question: If I am using a prime 1.4 like you said, do I have the aperature wide open? Or, if I have it set on F8 will there be enough light for my auto focus to work. Does it auto focus on what the lense is set at or available to do? If I have the aperature wide open, will I have trouble with depth of field?

 

Also, I want to ask Nikon users if there is a shoe mount transmitter for my flash that has the AF assist beam in it like the Canon STE2. I haven't heard of this. I'll be swithcing to the Fuji S3 soon, so anything that I buy, I want it to be compatable with that.

[al_kaplan1]

Autofocus SLR's have a focussing screen that really isn't worth a hoot for manual focus compared to the screens in manual focus SLR's. The ideal thing really is a rangefinder camera, whether a Canonet, Konica or any number of others from the 1970's. Most feature a 45mm f/2 to f/1.7 lens in a leaf shutter that synchs to 1/500 second. They have built in light meters (you won't need it for flash photography)but that probably won't be working. Many people fall in love with rangefinder photography and move up to interchangeable lens Bessas and Leicas, but that's Big Bucks! A used Canonet can be had for maybe $50 and another $30 to $40 will get you a used Vivitar 283 electronic flash.

 

For dance photos set the flash on an auto range that'll give you about f/8 with the film you're using. Set the distance on the scale on the lens for about 7 or 8 ft. for vertical shots. You should have depth of field from about 6.5 to 10 feet, which is easy to estimate. Forget the rangefinder! Just frame the subjects and move around the dance floor with them ~ they move, you move ~ keeping about 8 feet away.

 

Use a flash bracket to keep the flash directly over the lens to minimize side shadows or, and this is how I've done it for years, hold the camera in your right hand and your flash in your left. Considering that a good new bracket will likely cost nearly as much as your "new" outfit you might want to try this...LOL

 

You might even decide that the nice fast sharp lens with the big bright viewfinder makes it easier to shoot the rest of the wedding also, including available light shots without flash. Compared to your SLR you won't believe just how quiet your "new" outfit is, either.

[al_kaplan1]

Yes, your autofocus might work better with an f/2 or f/1.4 lens when it can't get enough light through a slower zoom. The lens on an SLR is wide open except during the instant it stops down the diaphragm for the exposure.

[think27]

In my "tip sheet" that I give my clients (tips about everything from timing to makeup to lighting and more) I tell my clients that if they want the best possible pics at the reception....Let me control the lighting. Even though I shoot wide open anywhere from 2.8 to 5.6 -- and shoot with 400 or 3200 film with two flashes.. dark rooms are my enemy. I would say 99% of the time the couple is on board with my needs. Since I have the permission ahead of time of the couple - I let the DJ and the hotel or catering contact know that it is up to me as per the couple to control the lighting. Since they know it is the couples priority to have good pictures vs dark lighting..they can't argue. I turn the lights down while they are eating and I tell the DJ that I'm only there for 1 1/2 hours of dancing and that when I leave the lights can go back down.

[nstock]

As suggested previously, set your camera on Manual focus and zone focus with a prime lens.

 

As to whether or not there is enough light at f8 to focus.. you need to understand that the camera does not stop down to F 8 until you press the shutter You focus and look through the lens and (except in certain cases using older manual equipment) you are looking through the VF and, therefore, the lens with it at wide open aperture. If you depress the DOF lever you will see it get darker (as well as see what is in focus at the aperture setting you have chosen). The DOF lever will tell you what it looks like through the lens at that aperture. Depending on the film you are using, flash setting etc. etc. this may or may not be the correct exposure.

 

It is important to know what a camera does if it were 100% manual because (as in this instance) you may need to opt for manual settings.

[kelly_flanigan1]

<IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-265.gif>

[johnmarkpainter]

Kari,

 

I have a Nikon SB-800 Flash that han AF Assist Infrared beam. I still think that the old

Manual way is better.

 

When

i shoot with my old Rollei/Leica cameras I have NO out of Focus shots. My N90S and D100

miss Focus a lot.

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

To get the most out of a camera's AF system you have know something about the specifics of that AF system. The N90s AF has 2 modes: wide and spot. The camera has to do more processing in the wide mode to determine what the subject is. Try the camera in spot mode. All SLR AF systems, because of the way that they determine focus, will have trouble on low contrast, no clear pattern subjects. This means that the camera will have trouble focusing on a plain white dress or black tux. You have to set the center of the AF sensor on something with something close to verticle lines (the N90s doesn't have a cross pattern sensor), and then recompose. I also suspect that the camera will AF better held horizontal, because of the orientation of the AF sensor. A flash with a infared AF assist beam will help a great deal becasue the flash will project a pattern so that the camera could even focus on a blank wall. Using a large aperture lens with Nikons will not help nearly as much with AF as it does wioth many Canons, because many Canons change how the AF works if a f2.8 lens (or faster) is used. Another thing that you can do is set the drive mode to continuous rather than single shot. In continuous mode the camera will fire even if the subject isn't in perfect focus. If the aperture is set to f8 DOF may cover the subject, and even if focus isn't perfect it can be better than completely missing the shot. A fast lens will make it easier to manually focus the lens. Just make sure the lens is stopped down so you get enough DOF if your focus is slightly off. The old time technique for MF dance shots, was to learn to be able to judge a couple of descrete distances, set the distance on the lens to the distance and then maintain that distance. (This was also how photographers dealt with manual flash: each discrete distance was a particular f stop.)

[al_kaplan1]

Yup. Back in the days of shooting with Rolleiflexes, Minolta Autocords, Yashicamats or other twin lens reflexes we about never focussed on the ground glass. Just set the distance on the scale and framed through the open sportsfinder on the hood.

 

You got really good at judging 5 ft., 7 ft., 10 ft., etc., and changed f/stops without ever giving it a thought. You ended up with nice sharp well exposed medium format negatives, any one of which would easily blow up to a crisp 16x20 or 20x24, and they positivly glowed as an 8x10 album print. Then folks got lured by the siren call of autoexposure, autofocus, zoom lenses, and started inventing excuses for their poorly exposed not quite sharp photographs.

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

That was also back in the days of "f11 and be there" (for MF). When AF came along, and got good with the Canon Eos, in the late 80's photographers started using large apertures for a very shallow DOF. It probably started with sports photographers, but it's become common for all sorts of subjects, including wedding photography. If you want that look you need large apertures and the hit rate with AF is much higher than manual focus.

 

Learning to use the auto cameras well is a somewhat different, but not always easier to aquire, than the old one. Getting any camera to do exactly what you want it do, for the exact look you want has never been easy. It take lots of practice.

[kevin m.]

Anyone interested in this subject should spend some time with the newer auto focus cameras, as their performance may surprise you. I just bought a 20d to replace an EOS-3 not only for digital capture, but because the 20d - to my surprise - is a better camera, the autofocus in particular. It will find focus in light levels low enough to challenge a handheld meter, and it certainly outperforms the EOS-3 in that regard.

 

I performed an AF test last night of the toughest focus subject I could think of, a bare wall. The only distinguishing mark was some tape residue that was barely visible to the naked eye. My handheld meter, a Sekonic L-308, metered the light as EV-5 @1600asa. With a 50 f1.8 mounted on the 20d, it locked focus every time using the center focus point. (The side focus points don't seem to be as sensitive, as they hunted a bit.) The autofocus didn't fail until the light meter displayed "eu" (for underexposure,) and in the same light it was pretty tough to focus my Leica M as well.

[al_kaplan1]

Bruce, I guess it's just a lot of experience but when I shot with the TLR I usually had the flash set for between 5.6 an 8, not f/11. With the Leica and a 35 or 50mm lens I'm mostly shooting at f/4 or f/2.8 with flash. When I do check the rangefinder shot to shot I'm always the right distance away from the subject. You just learn to judge distance! It is possible.

[colleendonovan]

Al, you remind me of my step dad. He was a really great photographer and I wish he was still around to teach me stuff. He never used auto anything, had all prime lenses and took beautiful micro pictures of these tiny, tiny flowers in the woods. Oh how I wish he was here now! I could use his advice.

[johnmarkpainter]

For focusing in low light, I will DEFINITELY take my Leicas anyday.

 

I was photographing a party the other night....ASA 1600 f1.2 @ 1/15-1/30 (not much

light!). It was nice to see that things were actually in focus (no depth of field of course!)

 

My Nikons would never have pulled that off (maybe an F5 with AF assist light would have?).

I have a Nikkor 55 1.2 that I can barely even use on my D100. Unless I have enough light

where I could have been shooting at 2.8 anyway, I can't focus @ 1.2

 

jmp

[fotografz]

I love my Leica's also, and am extremely practiced at focusing them in low light, but would

never suggest they could out-focus an EOS camera with a f/1.4 lens in any light let alone

dim circumstances. The Canons will AF on a black cat in a coal mine at midnight... in fact,

the black cat black can even be running ... which would be a complete crap shoot with a

Leica M and f/1.4 lens ; -)

[cjogo]

The Canon Flash has a assist beam...Our Quantum Q Flash has a pseudo "burst of light' modeling light. We usually pre focus for an area. After years of shooting - it is just about anticipation --waiting for your subject. A fixed aperture of 2.8 or wider is really a must. Set my zoom at 28 to 35 and move into position--wait for the subject to fall into my zone --5.6 to 8 key flash,,,or if the room light permits bounce strobe (which I prefer) 400 asa 1/15 @ 4.0

[steve_levine]

A 35mm lens, set to F8 will have DOF from around 5-15 feet.The frame of such a lens is around 3-4 people wide (in landscape orientation)at 10 feet.Once you can learn to accurately judge 7-10 feet, you are "good to go",and you can leave your AF camera home.

[patrick_lockwood]

I've used AF cameras that had a hard time focusing in the dark, had similar experiences with them, but my Elan IIe, with an 85mm F/1.8, well, I stood in a room with the lights off, so dark I could not see, and achieved focus. It has an excellent assist beam. The vast majority of the dance floor shots are sharp as a tack, with very little effort.

 

Find a camera that can cut the mustard, or learn to zone focus.

 

I once used a N65, and an F100, and both seemed fine in low light.

 

Best,

 

 

Patrick

[fotografz]

It really depends on what you want to achieve in terms of look. Zone focusing using an

aperture of say f/8 is fine, if reasonably sharp key subject and more in-focus areas behind

and in-front is the objective. When using flash it then becomes more difficult to also

capture ambient background lighting without dragging the shutter to the point that

ghosting of the main subject will occur.

 

What modern focus assist AF has done is opened up the possibilities of using wider

apertures in darker conditions to better isolate the main subject from the clutter so

prevalent at weddings and receptions... while allowing the OOF ambient backgrounds to

be recorded rather than a wall of black.<div></div>

[kevin m.]

Let me be blunt - A first, I know! ;-) - the latest AF cameras work almost as well as the human eye can see, and faster than you could possibly rotate a lens barrel by hand. With at least an f2.8 lens mounted, if you can't achieve focus it's your fault, period. In situations where an EOS-3 would hunt, the 20d just nails it. Futhermore, in those ridiculously low light levels, the 20d actually records an image worth keeping <i>without flash</i>. In low light, the latest AF and digital capture aren't just better than film, they can actually record things your eyes can't see in the same light.<div></div>