tony1164

I am not sure if this subject has ever been brought up, but here it goes. I would very much like to get my hands on a camera that does superbly in the big cathederals where lighting is limited. Does anyone have any pointers as to what I should lok for? I am planning a trip to Italy in the future and I would very much like to hear from the collective wisdom of this discussion board.
Thank You

sk72

You havent mentioned your price range and your expereince with photography in general. You have to look for a camera that can get relatively minimal noise at ISO 400 and ISO 800.
Personally I have two camera - Canon 20D and a Fuji F11. If money is no constraint then you cant beat a Canon DSLRs paired with good glass. For something like 300 USD either of Fuji F10/F11 or soon to be realsed F30 has no competition.

AnselmAdorne

tony1164, I assume you're thinking about being able to take photos in a church without a flash?

Let me stress that I am still a digital tyro, but my camera has an option to adjust the sensitivity from an ISO equivalent of 200 up to 1600. Adjusting it upwards is, I suppose, like using high-speed film.

Trouble is, many churches (especially Romanesque ones with small windows) are very dark inside. I have shot in such buildings with the ISO adjusted up towards the high end, but I still had to use a very slow shutter speed and a very wide aperture, neither of which is ideal under the circumstances. The answer might be a tripod, but I don't cart one of those to Europe.

One other issue. I have read that increasing the sensitivity of digital cameras raises the risk of aberrations in the image (there is a word for this that slips my mind at the moment). I haven't detected such problems in any of my high sensitivity photos.

Having said all that, I sure hope someone with more experience weighs in here; I'd love to learn more.

Anselm

TRSW

Anselm - The term you are looking for is 'noise'. I used a Nikon CoolPix 5900 for this picture

www.pbase.com/trsw/image/52005769

The camera has a 'museum' setting that automaticaly shuts off the flash and lets in more light.

Tom

basingstoke1

Another feature to look for is image stabilization. It is almost mandatory if you are using an exposure that is too long to rely on steady hands and you are not carrying a tripod.

AnthonyGA

Getting good pictures in a cathedral requires only a tripod. Getting good pictures without a tripod is extremely difficult: you must either use very high speed film (with film cameras), or very high sensitivity settings (with digital cameras). Both will produce somewhat grainy photos, and if the sensitivity isn't high enough, the shutter speed will be low and the photos will be blurred. Image stabilization is very limited in the compensation it can provide—usually only a stop or so.

Ramblero

As Basinstoke said....IMAGE STABILIZATION. Don't consider a digital camera without it. The (newer) Canon S2 IS or comparable is what you should be looking at. You can, according to reviews by owners, shoot at slow speeds and in unassisted, dark environments. Many museums (and, I believe) cathedrals won't allow the use of a tripod...for insurance liability reasons. While I don't have one (I currently use a Canon G3), it would be a must-have feature for my next camera...although I have sucessfully shot a lot of cathedral interiors in Italy without it.

AnselmAdorne

Tom, thanks for helping a failing memory, and that is a very nice photograph.

However, after posting, I remembered the word I was thinking of; it's "artifacts." So, is artifacts the same as noise or am I mixing apples and oranges, I wonder. Any wisdom would be appreciated. (tony1164, I'm not trying to hijack your thread, by the way. I think it's all related to your original query.)

Anselm

AnthonyGA

Artifacts are noise, since they are not part of the scene you are trying to capture. The main problem in low light, however, is noise. In film photography, noise takes the form of grain; in electronic photography, it takes the form of random increases in pixel levels unrelated to image content. It looks very much the same either way, though, and it's not pretty. Don't expect image stabilization or magic settings on the camera to fix this.

Jim_Tardio

AnthonyGA is right. You are seeing digital noise which is the result of a high ISO, usually above 400...but even 400 can look pretty awful on small, pocket digicams.

The best way to get good shots in any low light situation is with a tripod or some other camera support. If you are shooting digital, a tripod lets you keep the ISO low for almost noise-free images.

If you are truly after high quality cathedral shots, you'll want a DSLR or film SLR...a camera that lets you change lenses. You'll want a wide angle lens and a moderate telephoto, preferably f2.8 or faster. And, above all, you'll need a tripod (a small tabletop model works well), or some other form of moveable camera support.

Image stabalization is indeed useful, but you'll need more than that for the type of shots you describe.

Good entry level DSLRs are Nikon's D50 & Canon's Rebel XT, and also models from Pentax & Olympus (sorry, I don't know the model numbers).

Good luck & have fun.

suze

tony1164-

digital or film?

(crazy question i know)

halfpint

In order to photograph these churches well you must learn to hold your camera VERY STEADY and with my digital I use the eye viewer so I can hold it up against my face, then hold your breath at the beginning of the exposure and with my Konica Minolta dimage Z3 with the 12 zoom lens (again, you must either sit in a church pew to stabilize yourself or lean against a church pillar but it does work and I have some beautiful images I took a few weeks ago in the churches in Sicily and even IF FLASH WAS ALLOWED, it would ruin the lighting effect you are looking for anyway. And with this particular camera, the photos come out actually a little lighter than you can see them, but warm and beautiful. But it takes practice, practice, practice. Good luck. Halfpint