Low Light video

Michael Gruich · April 5th, 2010, 08:57 AM

Working with the kit lens right now and getting really bad results with low light video. The photos come out pretty good, but the video has a lot of grain.

Right out of the box I set it to manual and tried some low light footage at 1600 and 3200 ISO,...bad. Then went to the auto exposure the next evening and got better results, but nothing to brag about.

I have read today that you want to set the ISO between 200-800 in low light (have not had a chance to try this yet). Has anyone had any good luck with the kit lens and do you have a rule of thumb for low light\night footage?

Perrone Ford · April 5th, 2010, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Gruich

I have read today that you want to set the ISO between 200-800 in low light (have not had a chance to try this yet). Has anyone had any good luck with the kit lens and do you have a rule of thumb for low light\night footage?

Rule of thumb with the kit lens? Yes, remove it from the camera, and put it on Ebay. Use funds from sale to buy a decently fast lens, and watch problems disappear.

The kit lens is suitable for daylight footage or other similarly bright conditions. That is all. If you want good performance and you don't have a lot of light to work with, you need MUCH faster glass.

Terry Lee · April 5th, 2010, 09:37 AM

Scroll down in the T2i section and look for threads that pretain to lenses. There are all sorts of good lenses out there that people have experimented with and have had good results. You can find video examples (eventhough they are streaming youtube videos) of some lenses that people are using.

Michael Gruich · April 5th, 2010, 10:50 AM

Thanks for the replies, heading down the lens replacement road as we speak.

Great forum here.

Emil Gustafsson Ryderup · April 6th, 2010, 08:03 AM

I bought he camera with the kitlens (thinking it was cheap) but I never use it. Should have just bought the body and a 50mm 1.8 lens.

Drew Curran · April 6th, 2010, 01:12 PM

I quickly learned quite a few years ago in still photography that I needed a 'fast lens' starting at f2.8 zooms. The cheaper kit lens will quickly show it's limitations in anything but good light. In a naturally lit interior it will struggle unless you add good artificial lighting. The kit lens at 55mm and F6 will make life difficult causing high ISOs and therefore grain.

Drew.

Sam Kanter · April 6th, 2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Rule of thumb with the kit lens? Yes, remove it from the camera, and put it on Ebay. Use funds from sale to buy a decently fast lens, and watch problems disappear.

The kit lens is suitable for daylight footage or other similarly bright conditions. That is all. If you want good performance and you don't have a lot of light to work with, you need MUCH faster glass.

I don't agree. The kit lens is very good optically, just not very fast for low light situations. It performs very well outdoors, and has IS as well. I use it when I want to travel light.

Besides the 50mm 1.8, you need to spend some good bucks for fast lenses.

Robert Turchick · April 6th, 2010, 03:13 PM

let me recommend spending a few extra bucks, not a lot, and skip the 50mm 1.8 and go with the 50mm 1.4 Stunning in low light, almost generates it's own and it's $350. I can't keep it off my camera! Super for video and almost as nice as my 24-70mm 2.8 L which was almost 4 times more.

Terry Lee · April 6th, 2010, 06:29 PM

Well if he should go to something in the $350 range then I suggest the Sigma 30mm 1.4

Michael Gruich · April 7th, 2010, 02:30 PM

I set the camera to manual, then an ISO of 400 (200 was way too dark).
Very happy with the results, even with the kit lens. The lens was perfect in well lit areas and here is a frame grab of what I got in a pretty low light section of the building. The new lens is really going to help for sure and I am pretty happy with the results after getting the tips, thanks again.

Sean Woods · April 7th, 2010, 10:52 PM

Not to threadjack, but has anyone actually gotten just the camera body? I placed an order on March 6th at Amazon and it's still listed as a pre-order. Seems like that at other places as well.

John Vincent · April 7th, 2010, 11:43 PM

Here's the thing - the lens you get is worth more then it cost in the kit - it has IS, nice (if not lightweight) construction, decent focal range.

But it's not fast. It won't win any "best of" contests, but it's a solid lens that has produced some stunning results.

But not at night on a dark street. Not in a dark room. I like the kit lenses; glad I own it - but I bought Canon's 50mm/1.8 three days after getting the camera. Great deal - very fast, nice and crisp. Buck 10 in local camera shop.

So for amounts to $210, you can have two very tight lenses that are made for the camera by the company that makes the camera. In other words, they work, no questions asked...

...And I think that's a pretty good deal. And for $500 more you can get into a very nice, quite fast, wide angle piece of glass (Sigma). So for under a grand, you can have some very nice options, all of which can produce professional results.

john

Subbu Vedula · April 8th, 2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Woods

Not to threadjack, but has anyone actually gotten just the camera body? I placed an order on March 6th at Amazon and it's still listed as a pre-order. Seems like that at other places as well.

I got one from B&H 2 weeks back

Michael Gruich · April 9th, 2010, 08:50 AM

Samy's camera had them in stock, the web page shows they are out, but taking orders.

If you call, they can check and see if there are any in.

Samys

I think everyone is having a tough time keeping this camera on the shelf.

David St. Juskow · April 10th, 2010, 11:17 AM

Just to chime in on the continuing kit lens debate, I have to say, despite my earlier post about how disappointingly bad low-light video was using my kit lens, I've been shooting stills a lot with it (while I wait for my tokina 11-16... and wait...) and, for stills, it's pretty kick-ass. For a hundred dollar lens, I got some great shots at 3.5, iso 800, 1/2 second shutter speed- totally handheld, even, full manual focus. We're talking barely-lit here, yet sharp, warm photos.

Of course, those are stills. But there's clearly nothing wrong with that kit glass...

April 5th, 2010, 08:57 AM	#1
Michael Gruich New Boot Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: IOWA Posts: 22	Low Light video - Kit lens T2i Working with the kit lens right now and getting really bad results with low light video. The photos come out pretty good, but the video has a lot of grain. Right out of the box I set it to manual and tried some low light footage at 1600 and 3200 ISO,...bad. Then went to the auto exposure the next evening and got better results, but nothing to brag about. I have read today that you want to set the ISO between 200-800 in low light (have not had a chance to try this yet). Has anyone had any good luck with the kit lens and do you have a rule of thumb for low light\night footage?

April 5th, 2010, 09:37 AM	#3
Terry Lee Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 691	Scroll down in the T2i section and look for threads that pretain to lenses. There are all sorts of good lenses out there that people have experimented with and have had good results. You can find video examples (eventhough they are streaming youtube videos) of some lenses that people are using. __________________ https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=38313004

April 6th, 2010, 01:12 PM	#6
Drew Curran Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: N. Ireland Posts: 370	I quickly learned quite a few years ago in still photography that I needed a 'fast lens' starting at f2.8 zooms. The cheaper kit lens will quickly show it's limitations in anything but good light. In a naturally lit interior it will struggle unless you add good artificial lighting. The kit lens at 55mm and F6 will make life difficult causing high ISOs and therefore grain. Drew. __________________ Pixol www.pixol.co www.facebook.com/pixolmedia www.twitter.com/pixolmedia

April 6th, 2010, 03:13 PM	#8
Robert Turchick Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 1,389	let me recommend spending a few extra bucks, not a lot, and skip the 50mm 1.8 and go with the 50mm 1.4 Stunning in low light, almost generates it's own and it's $350. I can't keep it off my camera! Super for video and almost as nice as my 24-70mm 2.8 L which was almost 4 times more. __________________ The older I get, the better I was!

April 6th, 2010, 06:29 PM	#9
Terry Lee Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 691	Well if he should go to something in the $350 range then I suggest the Sigma 30mm 1.4 __________________ https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=38313004

April 5th, 2010, 10:50 AM	#4
Michael Gruich New Boot Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: IOWA Posts: 22	Thanks for the replies, heading down the lens replacement road as we speak. Great forum here.

April 6th, 2010, 08:03 AM	#5
Emil Gustafsson Ryderup New Boot Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 24	I bought he camera with the kitlens (thinking it was cheap) but I never use it. Should have just bought the body and a 50mm 1.8 lens.

April 7th, 2010, 02:30 PM	#10
Michael Gruich New Boot Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: IOWA Posts: 22	I set the camera to manual, then an ISO of 400 (200 was way too dark). Very happy with the results, even with the kit lens. The lens was perfect in well lit areas and here is a frame grab of what I got in a pretty low light section of the building. The new lens is really going to help for sure and I am pretty happy with the results after getting the tips, thanks again. Attached Thumbnails

April 7th, 2010, 10:52 PM	#11
Sean Woods Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 50	Not to threadjack, but has anyone actually gotten just the camera body? I placed an order on March 6th at Amazon and it's still listed as a pre-order. Seems like that at other places as well.

April 7th, 2010, 11:43 PM	#12
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Here's the thing - the lens you get is worth more then it cost in the kit - it has IS, nice (if not lightweight) construction, decent focal range. But it's not fast. It won't win any "best of" contests, but it's a solid lens that has produced some stunning results. But not at night on a dark street. Not in a dark room. I like the kit lenses; glad I own it - but I bought Canon's 50mm/1.8 three days after getting the camera. Great deal - very fast, nice and crisp. Buck 10 in local camera shop. So for amounts to $210, you can have two very tight lenses that are made for the camera by the company that makes the camera. In other words, they work, no questions asked... ...And I think that's a pretty good deal. And for $500 more you can get into a very nice, quite fast, wide angle piece of glass (Sigma). So for under a grand, you can have some very nice options, all of which can produce professional results. john

April 9th, 2010, 08:50 AM	#14
Michael Gruich New Boot Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: IOWA Posts: 22	Samy's camera had them in stock, the web page shows they are out, but taking orders. If you call, they can check and see if there are any in. Samys I think everyone is having a tough time keeping this camera on the shelf.

April 10th, 2010, 11:17 AM	#15
David St. Juskow Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: new york city Posts: 113	Just to chime in on the continuing kit lens debate, I have to say, despite my earlier post about how disappointingly bad low-light video was using my kit lens, I've been shooting stills a lot with it (while I wait for my tokina 11-16... and wait...) and, for stills, it's pretty kick-ass. For a hundred dollar lens, I got some great shots at 3.5, iso 800, 1/2 second shutter speed- totally handheld, even, full manual focus. We're talking barely-lit here, yet sharp, warm photos. Of course, those are stills. But there's clearly nothing wrong with that kit glass...