Canon Large Room Auto w/ Flash Extremely Dark

[phule]

<< While I will in no way use the 10 thousand photos I've taken as evidence of being an expert >>

 

Given that all 10,000 were taken in full auto mode, I would say that you are proficient at turning on the camera and pressing the shutter button. Since you don't know or understand what those cameras were doing to take the photos, nor do you appear to have the data from said photos to compare with the data from the S70 I don't see how you can use that as evidence. You simply do not know what any of the cameras were doing in full auto mode.

 

<< I am just shocked that I've never had a previous experience like this, where photos were coming out so dark with auto settings in similar lighting situations. >>

 

I've taken 10,500 photos with my camera in the past year and 2 months. I encounter new and difficult exposures every day.

 

<< One possible explanation is that in the past, all the of cameras had flashes with little buttons to manually (spring loaded) launch the flash, so the flash was off by default, but this camera has a fixed flash that is on by default. >>

 

When the flash fires is not the issue. How powerful the flash is and the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed it shoots as is the issue.

 

<< While the setting to lock the shutter speed makes some sense to over overexposure, I never ran into it before and did not see any documentation on it in the camera owner's manual, so I guess it's something only more advanced users stumble upon. >>

 

Given that it happens in full auto mode, the mode where, by design, you're limited to very little information, I'm not surprised you don't know this. Using the flash in P mode will make this setting obvious. The reason 1/60th is used is that it's a reasonably fast shutter speed to prevent blurry images from the user moving or shaking the camera.

 

<< I also never had a problem with photos coming out darker with the zoom extended, so it is something else I didn't have knowledge about going into yesterday's event. >>

 

This has already been explained.

 

<< Something else frustrating for me is the fact that this experience isn't well documented by others, or at least, I wasn't able to dig up similar experiences online, so I feel like it is only happening to me, and that has made me suspect my camera as the culprit. >>

 

Given that you lack knowledge of the terms you'd need to search with/on, this is not surprising in the least.

 

<< So, in conclusion, I'm sorry if I said anything to frustrate, annoy or disappoint you. >>

 

What is frustrating, annoying, and disappointing is your attitude. You don't appear to actually want to learn why this happened, you want an automatic solution. That's fine, lots of people just want an automatic solution. But when told there /is/ no automatic solution, and that you'll have to think about exposure, you dismissed all information as invalid and assumed that you knew better. Your false assumptions have lead to incorrect conclusions.

 

<< Perhaps in the future I will be able to take better photos in large rooms with mediocre lighting. >>

 

This will only be accomplished by you learning more about exposure, apertures, shutter speeds, and how to use them. You don't have to know what every single setting is, nor do you have to become a professional, you simply need to know how the settings apply to producing a well lit image.

 

<< What I mean by "your help isn't making my situation any better" is that I can't go back and give my friends good photos from yesterday, because they don't exist, >>

 

Were this timetravel.net and not photo.net, you might have a point.

 

<< and unless I can get good at selecting settings for such situations in the future, I might be poorly equipped to provide good photos once again. I was hoping there was a general setting for the auto mode I had missed that could have cleared up the problem, >>

 

There is. It's called, not choosing auto mode.

 

<< at least I can maintain wide angle and disable the zoom to remove the shutter lock, and hope for a steady hand so blur doesn't cause a problem. >>

 

If you turn on the flash in any mode other than Shutter Priority or Manual, the camera will set the shutter speed to 1/60th of a second. The zoom has nothing to do with the shutter speed. The zoom affects the aperture not the shutter speed.

 

With the previously mentioned noise filtering software, images taken at ISO400 can become quite nice. Even the most basic searching will produce praise for these two products. ISO400 will allow faster shutter speeds for the chosen aperture which would allow you to zoom in.

[phule]

<< Hope that clarified my response. >>

 

Given the imformation presented, I don't see any reason for your conclusion. It isn't supported by the basic facts.

[jonathan_ratzlaff]

certain happen when you turn on the flash. First of all the shutter speed increases to 1/60 sec or more. This cuts down any light from outside. Compact flash cameras do not have good flash output. The range of output at large fstops is pitiful and you get the results you showed.

That is why there his a hint of light on the car. this came from the weak flash bouncing off a reflective surface.

You got better flash range when you shot at f 2.8. You can see the flash range in this image.

There is no problem with your camera except that you are trying to get images that the camera is incapable of doing.

The only way to improve flash photography is to get a digital camrera that can take an external flash, pure and simple.

Have you ever seen a football game where all kinds of camera flashes are going off in the stands? Have you ever wondered if any of those pictures came our. You are doing the same thing except at slightly closer range.

There is no evidence of any problems with flash sync in any of your images, just operator error.

[john_baker8]

The simple fact is that the picture was taken in automatic mode in a dark room from TOO far a distance with the automatic flash. My sister had the same problem with her Canon digital rebel. She was in a school gym taking pictures of her kids from 100 feet away using 300mm zoom with flash in full auto mode. The pictures came out similar to yours. If your camera has a Night Portrait mode it might work better. The flash will go off plus the shutter will stay open longer to brighten up the background. Better yet, experiment with manual mode.

[david_bedell]

Jason, Rob's explanations have been great. The camera has certain limitations (the weak flash, the "slow" lens speed at telephoto settings, the low default ISO) that are kicking your butt in certain situations.

 

Even though you've taken tons of shots in auto (and may well be an excellent photographer), this experience probably means it's a good time for you to brush up on f-stops, sensor speed ratings, and shutter speeds (i.e. the exposure basics that underly how all cameras work) by reading a book or taking a class. The problem of creating a camera that can automatically figure out the exposure and focus of any scene is a problem that has NOT been solved--sometimes you have to override the camera's guess.

 

The advice of trying out various "Night" modes is good and in any kind of dark situation, use the camera's wide angle setting (where the lens is fastest) and "zoom with your feet" rather than going to telephoto. Also, I would suggest that even though the quality of the images at ISO 400 may not be as nice as 50, having any image is probably better than having none.

 

Good luck!

[jcbeck]

<p>Thank you Rob, Dave, etc...

 

<p>Dave, an extra thanks for the positive attitude.

 

<p>Here are some of the photos that were at least usable, though admittedly terrible quality nonetheless.

 

<p><a href="http://www.jcbeck.com/photos/gallery.asp?gallery_id=168" target="_blank">2005 Sweet Occasion Bridal Extravaganza</a>

 

<p>I am somewhat familiar with what the camera is doing, even when it's in automatic mode, but I was not aware of the shutter speed lock in automatic w/ flash mode. Still, I obviously need practice to familiarize myself with the settings. I'm just starting to remember what aperture means (low number means more light, shorter depth of field, right?), and I still have a hard time picking an appropriate shutter speed (too dark OR too blurry), but I do want to learn, especially as I run into the limitations of automation.

 

<p>Rob, you don't have to rub it in that taking most photos in automatic mode is just turning on the camera and snapping the shutter. You don't have to give everything such a negative slant to make a point. I said I was not an expert. I made no claims to contradict that, yet you still felt it neccesary to make a negative comment. What else do you want? Do you want me to beg and plead for your great and godly knowledge? Yes, you know lots and lots about taking photos. Yes, you even share that knowledge with others. How wonderful for you. Now how about trying on an attractive disposition to go with it?

[phule]

<< Rob, you don't have to rub it in that taking most photos in automatic mode is just turning on the camera and snapping the shutter. You don't have to give everything such a negative slant to make a point. I said I was not an expert. I made no claims to contradict that, yet you still felt it neccesary to make a negative comment. What else do you want? Do you want me to beg and plead for your great and godly knowledge? Yes, you know lots and lots about taking photos. Yes, you even share that knowledge with others. How wonderful for you. Now how about trying on an attractive disposition to go with it? >>

 

I wasn't rubbing anything in. I was explaining how your statement was wrong. Yet again, your assumptions are way off-base.

 

If I learn to add 2 and 2 and I do this ten thousand times, I don't suddenly know advanced calculus. You took your 10,000 photos as proof that you understood what the camera was doing, how it applied to this new camera (of which you had very little experience,) and came to the conclusion that this camera was at fault.

 

But you have very little idea /what/ those cameras were doing in full auto mode and therefore drawing that conclusion from 1, 10, or 10,000 photos is flawed. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to comprehend.

 

Regardless, you are the one that attacked me.

 

Your attitude and maturity level in this thread are sadly quite low. Your assumptions are wrong and your conclusions are erroneous.

[jcbeck]

Rob, I am sorry about my immature posts, attitude, and mistaken assumptions. I've tried to apologize in some way before, and I'm trying to make peace with you.

 

It was wrong of me to say you were rubbing it in. It felt that way to me, because I took it as an insult to my ability to take good photos.

 

I didn't mean to say that I knew what the camera was doing because of taking lots of photos. I meant I had certain expectations of the camera built from taking those previous photos. My expectations were wrong, and I learned that, but not before this event or much of our conversation. I do comprehend now that my conclusion that the camera was at fault was wrong, and I thought I stated that by now.

 

I am sorry for any attacks I made have made on you. There are not excused because of my frustration or feeling like my photography was being insulted.

 

Regardless of my attitude and maturity during some of our discussion, I ask you to please forgive me, move on, and stop using negative words to describe me.

[phil_young3]

Jason,

 

You don't need to apologize to Rob, he may be very knowledgeble, but he really is a major A-- Hole at heart. Just take the camera back to the store and exchange it for another one.

[phule]

<< You don't need to apologize to Rob, he may be very knowledgeble, but he really is a major A-- Hole at heart. Just take the camera back to the store and exchange it for another one. >>

 

The irony of your post and your ignorance exposed by it left me laughing for quite a while. Thank you.

[phil_young3]

You see what I mean about Rob?

[phule]

Anyone can see through you, Phil. Try again, but think up something more original this time.

[christian_bettencourt]

Jason, it would appear to be the camera. I have an A75. I have always used it on auto mode and it has always given me fantastic pictures in any lighting condition. Today I was using it during my son's birthday party. for 2 hours the pictures were fabulous. Then the next picture I took was EXACTLY the same as your display. I thought it was the batteries so I swapped them. Nothing. Then after fiddling and fiddling, I found out too, that when the flash is off, it takes the proper picture. With the flash on its dark as night. And it works "OK" in P mode. I've taken it in to be looked at and yes, its broken. After a whooping 2 months it breaks. I'm not impressed. As it is I'm tempted to whip it at the wall I'm so frustrated.

[phule]

<< Jason, it would appear to be the camera. >>

 

No, it is not.

 

<< I've taken it in to be looked at and yes, its broken >>

 

You were lied to.