Low Light Reception Photography w Pentax K10d

[bethtphotos]

<p>I shot a wedding yesterday using my two Pentax K10ds, one with a wireless Pentax AF540 FGZ & a Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens, the other with a Pentax 50mm f/1.4 lens. I left my meter mode @ the 16 point multi segment mode.<br>

The reception room had lovely chandelier lighting, and big wide windows at a far end, but it was quite dim, necessitating the flash unit. I've got several problems though, and need help, please:<br>

1) when shooting with such large apertures in low light w/out flash, I have a tough time getting the whole scene in focus. If I have 3 guys standing, for instance, and inevitably one to the left or right is slightly fuzzy.<br>

2) in low light, with high aperture settings, without flash, motion is the bane of my existence. the movement of a hand, a foot, is never frozen, as the shutter speed has to be slow in order to allow enough light in. High ISO settings add noise & graininess. Is there a balance? <br>

3) With the flash unit attached & ready to go, should I really have to set my ISO at 1600 with these lenses? Otherwise, I seemed to still get relatively dark pictures.<br>

4) Is bouncing the light off the ceiling generally the best prescribed position: meaning: pointing the flash straight up (w/ diffuser attached).<br>

5) I still struggle with White Balance..it seems none of the settings in the FN menu really get me close & I consistently have to correct in post processing. I've learned to live with it , and shoot raw when I can, but its a time sucker.<br>

The motion issues are what really are getting me down, I had to discard nearly 40% of my photos from yesterday because of this.<br>

Please help, wedding photography requires such fast transitions that I'm beginning to wonder if I'm just not a fast enough thinker/mover to use the Pentax...would a Canon or Nikon be more suitable for a photographer of my limited capabilities & need for speed?</p>

[trw]

<p>1) This is the nature of Large Apertures ... They produce small depth of field. Try to get the subjects you're interested in all in the same plane or use smaller apertures.</p>

<p>2) This is the nature of low light shooting. Learn to time your shot, and use fill flash to open the shadows a bit so you don't have as much grain issues at high ISO. I use AV mode, positive exposure compensation (over expose slightly) and negative flash compensation (for fill only, not key lighting) when shooting low light. if it's only for fill, the pop-up flash works wonders in low light (with a CTO gel).</p>

<p>3) Totally depends on the existing light.</p>

<p>4) Straight up with a diffuser is only slightly better than straight forward with no diffuser. This produces only top light, while throwing away most of the power. Try reading planetneil.com articles on how to use flash effectively on camera, and strobist.com for how to use it effectively off-camera. These are the two best sites I know of for learning these complimentary techniques.</p>

<p>5) Let me guess... you're using flash in a room lit by tungsten lights... both planetneil and strobist have articles on how to use gels (coloured celophane) to match the colour of the flash light to the colour of the ambient light.</p>

<p>6) <strong>Your issues will not be solved by switching camera brands. They are best solved by education and practice. </strong></p>

[mcmanamey]

<p>Especially in a room like that, I've about given up on P-TTL and shoot in A (we also shoot K10s and the 540FGZs). Our reception last week was the final - the darn flash was just being shut down too fast. Complain to Matt (yes, he thinks faster on the fly) and he put me in A mode. Presto!!! Perfect flash exposure, large eye rolls from me (mostly from not thinking about doing so myself).</p>

<p>1) When shooting w/ large apertures in any light, you're depth of field is just going to be too low to get 3 people fully in focus if they're not all just in a perfect straight line, all exactly the same distance from you. <br>

I did just think of something - how do you have your AF control set? AF.C ? AF.S? In AF.C, your camera will allow you to take a picture that isn't quite in focus yet, and I do know even our DA* has to hunt a lot in the dark.</p>

<p>2) Motion is the bane of all existences. I have 722 photos shot by a completely new assistant, and I might have 20 keepers. She was shooting at 1/8th with no flash. Neither of us realized this (being focused on the video as that's what we were actually being paid to shoot last week....), so didn't know until I downloaded her pix on Monday. Whoops, oh well, it was a no-photo/no-pressure situation, really. Although, there are some that make it a fairly cool effect..... <br>

The balance is: Shoot around ISO 800, slightly over expose, according to the camera, and mostly.... use the flash. No flash at receptions is just a no-go.</p>

<p>3) You should be able to stay around ISO 800, and get a little ambient light by slowing the shutter down to about 1/20th. There may be some motion blur there, but you will still have the frozen motion from when the flash fired.</p>

<p>4) Bouncing off the ceiling is going to totally depend on the ceiling. About the highest ceiling you can effectively use for bouncing your flash is 10ft. Assuming it's white or cream. Any color in the ceiling, and you're sunk. <br>

With a light diffuser on and your flash pointed straight up, I would recommend having something on top of the flash to help return light down if the ceiling is over 10ft up. Anymore I tend to run with the "lid" off my lightsphere only when the ceiling is 8ft.</p>

<p>5) White Balance - if I'm laughing it's only in sympathy. I PROMISE!! I just shoot RAW always and white balance in Aperture (Macs only). I don't know how Lightroom works for that, but in Aperture it's one click, so I don't even consider the time involved anymore. I also rarely use it in the reception photos....</p>

<p>All of us here promise you will get better with practice. No, you do NOT need to trade camera systems - (but if you do, I'll take that 50 - 135 off your hands :D ) A lot of shooting & being fast is just having done it so much, it becomes 2nd nature. I'm not even entirely there yet, and I find me reminding myself of how to get particular looks while I'm shooting (lots of ambient light while using the flash to light up the details, for instance. Always takes me 2 shots min before my fingers remember what to do, and I get it nailed.)</p>

[jptreen]

<p>Beth, Maria has rather hit it on the head!</p>

<p>Dingy wedding receptions do not always yeild the best technical shots - and I would say it's just as, if not more important to get the feeling right. Take the shot below...shot with a 20ft roof in a huge room that was dimly lit by an even mixture of tungsten and florescent lighting.<img src="http://www.jptreen.com/sites/default/files/images/about_me/a%20question%20of%20taste.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="732" /></p>

<p>Three shots, grabbed the first one because I thought something nice might happen - stayed on track for the second, and got the money shot with #3. It was a terrible photograph, right? Direct flash, (Metz 54-AF1 - main head bounced, for all the good it did, and secondary reflector straight at them.) White Balance so screwed (3 radically different light sources, foreground WB very different to background WB) that I was forced to convert to WB, and a messy carpet background to distract from the final image.</p>

<p>Sure, but what <em>did </em> I have? f/4, enough to give me a decent DOF for the shot, flash to freeze, slow enough shutter to burn the background burn in, and ISO400 to keep the grain down, shooting the flash in 'A' mode.</p>

<p>Looking at it now I see I could've moved for a better composition, but that's not your question. Can you use Pentax kit in a speedy way to take improvised shots in the gloom? Yes you can. It'll take a bit of playing around to find which settings work in which situations, but doing that will just make you better at it for next time - <strong>just know that you can go and play with your Pentax kit now in the certain knowledge that what you are after is possible!</strong></p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Beth,<br>

Both Trent and Maria have provided you with great advice which I can only supplement to a small extent. Trent's no. 6 says it all really. I used the DA* a lot for indoor shooting, but with a Metz 58 AF strobe. Don't know if the Pentax model provides an AF-assist beam with shooting in AF.S, but the Metz does and it help with faster, accurate AF.</p>

<p>I have configured the USER mode for indoor flash only. ISO 800 is my sweet spot and I have flash exposure comp upped +1. I aim for f 4.5 as a good working aperture. Anything slower than 1/30 is going to be blurry. Sometime you can use that blur for artistic effects.</p>

<p>Different diffusers have different techniques. I am a big fan of Joe Demb's Flip-it and in a setup like your wedding I'd position the diffuser straight up, but as Maria says, I have the white reflector card at a 45-degree angle aiming the light back across.</p>

<p>I tend to shoot P-TTL (using M mode), but with some daylight coming in, A-mode works wonderfully. The Metz has a secondary flash in bottom front that solves some problems.</p>

<p>White balance is a challenge for most mortals. If you have the luxury, then shoot RAW and in your software establish a WB template for all the other shots-Lightroom works this way with one-click too, though I tweak beyond the click. If you are shooting JPEG or want less WB post-processing, then learn to create a customized WB using a white card. An Expodisc or similar products can be beneficial, but it's one more thing to buy and shlep around. It helps if you can show up prior to the activities to get the right readings. The Pentax custom WB is easier to do than competing platforms I find.</p>

<p>As far as other platforms, for my job I have to review event shots taken by shooters using all the other platforms. They are all equally wonderful and imperfect. See also Trent's no. 6.</p>

<p>At the risk of contradicting what I just wrote, I do find the K20D a better low light performer than the K10D--especially when shooting jpeg. I suspect the K-7 will be even better. That said if your skills improve you won't care about hardware issues all that much, there are always going to be limitations in some way.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[markus maurer]

<p>you got some fine pentax equipment and simply have to learn how to drag the shutter. Low speed flash at around iso 400 and around 1/30-1/45 at F4-F5.6 and bouncing to the next white wall or even off your white shirt without a diffuser eating light but a card behind your flash to spill some light forward would have been the solution.</p>

[markus maurer]

<p>and, as soon as you get decent results with the flash in automatic mode and dragging the shutter, do yourself a big favour and try all (camera & flash) manual mode for **consistent** results .-) with digital it's easier than it sounds. </p>

[jtk]

<p>For better depth of field, use a wider lens. 50mm is a LONG lens (short tele) for Pentax.<br>

Get closer to the subjects, using a 35mm or the 21/3.2.... Sigma 30/1.4 might be perfect. <br>

Seems redundant to have 50 on one body and a 50-135 on the other. </p>

[jptreen]

<p>John, I disagree that 50-135 on one and 50/1.4 on the other is redundant. It really depends on your style of shooting. I have commonly used 18-50/2.8 on one camera with attached flash and a 50/1.4 on another shooting available light. It's a system that works nicely for me, enabling me to get good 'coverage' shots, and then have the 1.4 handy for 'romantic' shots, or the like. I do have to say though, that since getting a Sigma 24/1.8, I've found my use of the 50/1.4 has dropped off. Getting closer with a wider lens is surely good advice, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a pointless combo.<br>

As for the better DoF with a shorter lens, if you're shooting a photo of three guys with the same f/stop filling the same amount of the frame, the DoF will be the same and you'll still have some out of focus - if you're shooting flash, the advantage of being able to drop the shutter speed lower on a wider lens is lost because you're probably dragging it below the 'red line' anyway to pick up the ambient - you may get sharper backgrounds, but I'd say the difference is marginal. I'd say get close because close makes for interesting photos, not because it'll give you more DoF. You still need to manage the flash issue.</p>

[jtk]

<p>John-Paul, your experience is proving my point :-) </p>

[mc2imaging]

<p>Another point I'm surprised Maria didn't make: When it is REALLY dark, I close the Aperture down to 5.6 or 8 on my DA* 16-50, turn off the AF, keep the lends on the wide end, and roll the focus a little short of infinity. I usually don't even look through the viewfinder most of the time...<br>

Definitely a technique that requires a little practice to get a feel for, though...</p>

[mcmanamey]

<p>yeah yeah yeah..... excuse my recall being cr@p when I'm tired....<br>

When those kind of shots work, the results are interesting - too bad framing is a real trick....<br>

I think I used the better one of this in the POW a couple weeks ago.</p><div></div>

[mcmanamey]

<p>I'm editing this whole thing. I forgot the point I was making, mid-typing. Yep, my brain's working *well* right now.</p>

[mcmanamey]

<p>Ok, seriously, I have just completely forgotten where I was going. Sue me, I'm hearing a conversation, was trying to watch tv, and am recuperating from 6am - 730pm w/ FIVE 6yr old girls and a 3hr round trip (included in the hrs).</p>

<p>I guess this one is more - been there done that, keep plugging. This was the 1st reception we'd shot at where <strong>every</strong><strong> single</strong> light was <strong>off</strong>. I repeat... every single stinking light. DJ strobes only. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. I sent Matt out w/ the K10 and took over the video, I was so frustrated because the AF could NOT focus.... I think this is the reception where Matt sold me on setting up DJ lights w/ strobes inside, tied to radio slaves.</p>

<p>Every once in a while - go w/ the bad shot - it might look cool (ok, rarely, but still....)</p>

<div></div>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Bounce flash rules. This shot was taken in pitch black darkness, the only light was coming from candles on a birthday cake in front of the birthday boy to camera right.</p>

<p>Equipment used: K10D + Kiron 24mm f/2 + Vivitar 2600 flash (bounced). Zone focusing, like Matt recommended.</p><div></div>

[photom]

<p>You may consider using a different lens for some of your reception shots. You mentioned everything being 50mm or longer.</p>

<p>31mm lens at 12 ft. from subject, at f2.0 aperture gives DOF of 3.71 feet which should be good for many small group shots.</p>

[bethtphotos]

<p>I really appreciate all your comments. One, it tells me that I'm not alone in my frustration, but there's a "light" at the end of the tunnel...get it?!<br>

You've given me lots to play with, and Maria, I could just kiss you for your concrete suggestions. I will definitely try A setting on my flash (never occurred to me!) & will reset to AFS mode (I was in A.F.C...you are brilliant for noting that!).<br>

John-Paul, I think you're right about capturing the moment at a reception, and perhaps worrying a little less about th technical perfection of each shot. However, even your photos have a crispness in focus that I struggle to achieve. I always seem to have a softness...but could that be related to shooting flash in A vs. PTT-L? <br>

Markus: I love your specific suggestion re: how the diffuser was eating the light, and how a card behind the flash would have forced the light forward...hmmm, I have another wedding in two weeks & I am definitely going to try that. But when you say, "drag the shutter" I don't fully understand what that means.<br>

John: I don't agree that the 50mm 1.4 & the 50-135 2.8 are redundant. My goal was to be able to use the 50mm where I didn't need flash...I notice a significant difference between my 1.4 & my 2.8...also, when there is beautiful colored light (which there wasn't at this particular wedding) the 1.4 lens really allows me to soak up the ambiance without flash. That being said, perhaps in this lighting situation I could have used my f/4.5-5.6 lens with another flash unit or my Sigma 17-35 lens & gotten up close.<br>

Matthew: I would like to sound intelligent when I say: "huh?" are you shooting in completely manual? When its completely dark, I have a hard time getting my aperture to 5.6 -8...& how do you roll the focus to infinity? I'm not sure what you mean by that.<br>

I am now on my way to planetneil & strobist to learn more, then its to trail the family in dark rooms till I get it right!!!<br>

Thanks for all your advice. I'm printing this out to save, you are all Obi-wans to me.</p>

[mcmanamey]

<p><strong>Dragging the shutter</strong> - If you're getting a decent exposure, or "proper" even, on your main subject at say 1/60th, then DRAG the shutter down to 1/20th or slower allowing the ambient light to come in in the background. For instance, the shot I posted of the dancers in blue - the strobes were giving me enough light, I bet I could have sped up around 1/20th or so (remember, pitch black) BUT we can see the dance floor & building behind them because I was shooting at 1/8th. The other reason to do this would be to have definition AND motion blur in the same shot.</p>

<p><strong>Focus near infinity</strong> - On your lens, turn the focus ring all the way to the right to where it stops. Then pull it back to the left just a hair. Infinity focus is really more for landscape, focusing "way out there"... where close stuff will not be in focus, but very distant things will be. By pulling it back to the Left a little, you're going to bring your focus point closer in than "way out there". By using the flash and closing the aperture down a bit (5.6 ish), you're basically hoping to create enough depth of field the camera will focus on SOMEBODY, fire, and give you more than just their right nostril in focus. If you're really lucky, they and the people right around them will be in decent focus.</p>

<p>Now, the point of using this method - other than not having enough light for the camera or the focus assist light to focus well..... It's kind of fun for just popping off shots at the reception. The one I posted above (again, the blue dancers), was shot w/o looking through the view finder. In this case, just held the camera down around knee level, aimed fairly generically (hence the missing heads, obviously) and shot. Oh - and the camera is actually in manual focus mode for this method. The camera can be forced to fire if not in focus, so this isn't a guarantee - it's just a lot of fun when there's lots of dancing, and NO light.<br>

I'm not opposed to getting down on the floor and actually looking to compose my shots, but to get low enough for what we want can be a real trick sometimes. Especially at that wedding, where I had baby belly just flat (or round, i guess, it should be) in the way of me pulling off some moves I usually do :D</p>