Yesterday I was at Point Lobos shooting a variety of wildlife, nature, and landscape subject. As I worked I found myself using the live view feature of my Canon EOS 5D Mark II very frequently – partly for reasons I’ve written about before, but largely for two reasons that I’d like to briefly mention.
Much better depth of field preview – Everyone knows about the small depth of field preview button on the body near the lens. Since the lens is open to the widest aperture when you focus you cannot tell what your depth of field will be until you push this button to stop down to the aperture that you’ll use for your shot. There are two problems with this technique: you cannot judge sharpness critically enough across the frame in the viewfinder and the viewfinder becomes incredibly dim if you stop down to small apertures like f/16. Put those two problems together and the usefulness of the preview button is diminished. However, when you use live view the camera automatically adjusts when you press the preview button and the image is still plenty bright to see on the LCD. Even better, you can zoom in to 5x or 10x magnification to carefully check sharpness. All in all, this makes DOF preview a much more useful feature when live view is used.
You can compose a photograph when using neutral density filters to extend exposure – At one point this weekend I was using a 9-stop neutral density filter to make exposures of the surf with durations in the 10-20 second range. My usual practice is to compose the shot and, if necessary, manually focus without the filter attached. Once the shot is set up I attach the filter. Unfortunately, the filter renders the scene virtually invisible through the viewfinder. Recomposing or manually focusing requires removing the filter, making adjustments, and then reattaching the filter. I discovered yesterday that live view mode can display the image in the LCD even with my 9-stop ND filter in place, allowing me to make changes to the composition/framing or adjust focus without removing the filter
(Shortly after posting this I got a message from B&H photo saying that they again have the Canon EOS 5D Mark II back in stock, and unlike some other dealers they sell it with no markups at the list price of $2669.95.)
I have shot a few thousand frames with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II now. I’ve photographed a variety of subjects including a few days of rainy professional bicycle stage racing, several landscape subjects, and a productive evening of night photography with The Nocturnes at Mare Island Naval Shipyard. I plan to eventually write up something resembling a comprehensive report on my experience, but so far there hasn’t been time. With that in mind, here is a short piece on one new feature in this camera and my experience with it.
Among the photographic subjects that interest me is night photography, often of urban and industrial subjects, but occasionally of wild landscapes also. There are a number challenges to shooting in very dark conditions, but one of the more interesting is getting good focus in conditions where auto-focus often can’t find a target to work with and where it is too dark to manually focus. (I wrote a bit about this in a recent piece: “Hints for Night Photography.”)
During my last Mare Island shoot I discovered that Live View provides a very useful option for focusing at night. On the 5D II, the Live View mode raises the mirror and lets you look at a “live view” of your scene on the rear LCD. In very dim light the trick is to find something that might provide a manual focus target, center the rectangular LCD indicator over that “something,” zoom in to 10x magnification on this object, and then focus manually on the LCD image. I was amazed at the low light levels at which this works quite well. A vertical line in a wall, the edge of a window, a bit of cyclone fence, or a small light – any of these become decent manual focus targets using Live View.
When I started my Mare Island evening shoot, using this camera for the first time at night, I mostly did things the old fashioned way. By the end of the evening, in any very dim situation I was successfully and much more quickly getting good focus using Live View. I’m confident that night photographers are going to find that this is a very powerful and useful feature.
(Revisions: April 21, 2017; March 8, 2018; December 18, 2018 July; July 2019.)
Building with Green Windows, Moonlight
A reader wrote and asked how I determine exposure times for night photography, and I decided my answer so that others can see it. Once I started writing, I decided to go ahead and share more basic techniques that can be very useful for night photography, too — including things like focus, etc. This isn’t a comprehensive coverage of the subject, but it does touch on a few key ideas.
First, for information about the techniques of nocturnal photography (and for some great examples of the photographic results and for workshop opportunities) I recommend a visit to the web site of The Nocturnes, the San Francisco Bay Area night photography group more or less run by Tim Baskerville. I’ve joined them on many night photography shoots, and the resources at their web site provide a ton of basic information that will save you many frustrating nights of trial and error. (I’m a member of a related group, Studio Nocturne SF, a collective of photographers who do night photography and exhibit as a group.)
Since so much of the basic information is available there, I’ll just add a few techniques and ideas that I find useful, especially for shooting with DSLRs. Here they are, in no particular order.
Consider using your camera’s long exposure noise reduction system — On my Canon DSLRs this setting causes the camera to make a second “dark frame” exposure following your “real” exposure. You might be tempted to forego this option since it doubles the time required for each exposure – your 60 second exposure will be followed by a 60 second dark frame exposure, while you stand there and twiddle your thumbs. (Or, do what I do – start composing your next shot.) DSLRs are subject to increased noise and “hot pixels” with very long exposures, but the dark frame provides the camera’s software with a reference that contains only the noise and hot pixels, and it can use this to map out (or subtract) the noise, etc from the image.
Support Columns, Purple and Green Wall
(Experiment with your own camera to discover the exposure lengths that benefit from the use of this setting. Modern digital cameras are less susceptible to noise issues than these cameras used to be. Some of the most recent digital cameras will not really need to use this feature much, if at all.)
Rely on your histogram to check exposure — do not rely on how the shot looks in the display. If the shot looks like what you see at night, in most cases it will be way underexposed — and, as a result, you’ll have a very noisy image and you may end up with artifacts like noise and banding. Instead, use an exposure that produces a balanced histogram curve — or, “expose to the right,” as many of us like to say. Your exposure may look brighter than the scene looks in person, but you can darken things in post and thus reduce visible noise even further. With many subjects, a well-exposed night photograph will look just as bright as one made in daylight.
Shoot wide open at high ISO to calculate basic exposure – If you have a f/1.4 lens and can set your camera to ISO 3200 or higher, do so. Let your camera make an automatic exposure and use that as a starting point. For example, if you get a decent (though noisy and otherwise awful looking) exposure at ISO3200, f/1.4, and 1 second you can work backwards from there to get a better exposure. Switching back to ISO 100 means that you need 5 stops more light, so your exposure time will go from 1 second to 32 seconds. (Count 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32.) Changing your aperture back to a more reasonable f/8 means another 5 stops or about a 17 minute (!) exposure – if my quick calculations are correct. (Update: I understand that if you can do this at ISO 6400 you can do a straight conversion from seconds to minutes – e.g. if the exposure at some aperture is 1 second at ISO 6400 the claim is that it will be 1 minute at ISO 100 at that same aperture.)
Man in White, Mosco Street
Apertures and ISOs that work in the daytime are good starting points for long exposure night photography — If f/8 at ISO 100 is your preference for daytime landscapes, then there is a good chance that these will be about right for night time landscapes as well. It just takes longer — sometimes a lot longer. If you are shooting a subject that would use larger apertures and smaller DOF in the daytime, you can probably use similar apertures at night. (This advice is mostly intended for those shooting from the tripod. When shooting handheld in very low light you may have no choice but to use a large aperture and a higher ISO. Fortunately today’s cameras are very good performer at higher ISO values, and some post-processing noise-reduction will usually produce a good image.)
Find something to focus on — Getting good focus stymies many night photographers. There are several approaches that you can try, and the right choice will vary depending on the shot.
If there is a relatively bright spot in your composition – perhaps a light bulb, a reflection, the moon, etc. — place an autofocus point right on top of it and see if it will acquire focus. Then switch AF off and recompose the shot if necessary.
Sometimes there is nothing in the scene that will provide enough light/contrast for autofocus to work. Look around for something outside of your composition that is about the same distance away — focus on that, switch AF off, and recompose.
Temporarily place a light in the scene — a bright flashlight or your smartphone will work — and focus on it.
You may be able to create a usable focus point by shining a laser pointer beam into the scene and focusing on it. Sometimes a bright enough handheld light or flashlight will be enough.
If you have one “must work” shot to make and plenty of time, you could set up the shot and determine focus during the daylight and leave the camera in position for your night exposure. (A potential focus shift due to temperature changes is real but likely inconsequential.)
Manual focus may be a possibility – either by trying to get a point light source such as a bright star (or your laser pointer, or a light placed in the scene, etc.) to focus manually through the viewfinder or by relying on the distance scale on the lens barrel.
Since perfect focus may be more elusive at night you have another reason to consider smaller apertures with their greater depth of field — they are a bit more forgiving of less-than-absolutely-perfect focus.
If your camera has a “live view” feature, you may be able to manually focus in light light levels at which neither AF nor traditional manual focusing will work – highly recommend for night photography work! See the exposure simulation feature on your camera.
With very long exposures, precise exposure time is less critical than you think — When shooting in the daytime very small changes in absolute exposure time make a bit difference. If you shoot at 1/100 second, increasing the exposure time to 1/50 second doubles the exposure. But at night things are a bit looser. If you are making a 6 minute exposure, you’d have to be off by six minutes to double the exposure or by three minutes to cut it in half. With that in mind, a few seconds hardly matter at all. I don’t bother with automated timers. I just count seconds (or chimpanzees, or hippopotamuses, or whatever…) or use my watch. That said, if you do have a timer you can probably let your mind wander a bit more while you enjoy your nighttime surroundings during the long exposure.
Daytime exposure tricks often work just as well at night — When photographing high dynamic range scenes during the day I may make two exposures — one for shadows and one for highlights — and use masks to combine them in post. The same situation often arises at night, especially if you have a shot that includes dark areas and bright artificial light sources. You may need to make one exposure that gets some detail from the shadows and a second that avoids blowing out the bright light sources.
Lens hoods are extra important with night photography — That may seem completely counter-intuitive, but when shooting at night you often have light coming from many more directions than when you shoot in sunlight, and the potential for flare increases. (You also may be a bit more likely to bump your lens into something, and the hood offers some physical protection.)
People in front of a San Francisco storefront at night
Try shooting handheld — While most night photography is going to require a tripod, modern digital cameras often work effectively enough at high ISOs that you can shoot many subjects without a tripod. For example, I now do almost all of my urban night photography handheld, shooting with relatively large aperture prime lens at ISO1600-6400 or even higher.
Try a small mirrorless camera — For some kinds of night photography, such as my night street photography, a small digital camera can be ideal. For one thing, the small cameras are often unobtrusive and less likely to draw attention to you. Many of them work very well at high ISO settings, and all ow you to shoot handheld in typical urban environments. Their electronic displays can often give you a usable view of your scene even in extremely low light.
That’s a quick list. Hope you find it useful! Have a question or something to add? Leave a comment below!
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more. Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
I’ve used the Canon 5D for the past few years, and it is a very fine camera for most types of photography and an excellent camera for my photographic purposes. I find the advantages of the full frame sensor to be compelling: potentially higher image resolution, a greater range of useful apertures, the ability to shoot at smaller apertures than on cropped sensor cameras, and so forth. Any criticisms of the camera that I might have are truly minor. (A mirror lockup button would be nice… ;-) Other photographers have agreed, and the 5D has probably been the most popular full frame DSLR until now. It is a favorite of those who shoot landscape, and I’ve seen people using it successfully to shoot almost any type of subject.
Given the relatively brief product life of DSLRs – they are often replaced by updated/new models in as little as 18 months – many had been expecting an update to the 5D for some time. When Canon announced and released the new 5D Mark II (5D II or 5D2 for short) this fall, the excitement among Canon photographers peaked. At some discussion forums I read you might find that half of the posts concerned this camera at times!
The specifications explain why the 5D II is such a compelling camera. The photosite density of the full frame sensor has been increased, and the new model has a 21+MP sensor, nearly double that used in the original 5D- but with higher ISO capability, greater dynamic range, and no increase in noise. It incorporates newer Canon DSLR features including “live view,” an exciting HD movie mode, Canon’s sensor dust reduction system, the ability to fine tune the auto-focus system to your lenses, increased “weather resistance,” and more. All of this and the price has actually dropped a few hundred dollars from the list price of the original 5D.
Many photographers have gone to great lengths to be the very first to get the new camera. They have signed up on “waiting lists.” Some have paid pre-order fees so that they would “have dibs” on the first boxes to arrive. Others frantically post on forum boards asking which dealers have one in stock, and are apparently ready to drive great distances to pick one up. I’ve even seen a few posts in which the writer offered many hundreds of dollars as a “finders fee” to anyone who would locate a 5D II. And you can be quite sure that all of these folks are paying full list price (and more) for their new cameras.
Not me.
There is a pretty decent chance that I’ll get this camera eventually, but I’m in no big hurry to be the “first on my block” to get one. Here are some of the reasons:
My existing 5D produces quite good image quality already. While the 5D II is capable of “better” resolution, the difference is certainly one of degree and not a “night and day” difference. When I make good sized prints, sensor resolution is rarely the limiting factor – whatever enlargement limit I encounter is more likely due to focus issues, lens issues, camera motion issues, and so on. Already having a camera that is capable of capturing images with excellent resolution, I’m know that I do not need to rush to get the incremental improvement that the 5D II might provide.
I prefer not to be a beta tester. There is a very good chance that problems will be discovered when the first production run of any product finds its way into the hands of end users. Nothing against the manufacturers (in the majority of cases), but when many thousands of photographers use a new camera it should not surprise anyone that certain subtle issues emerge. In fact, it appears that this may have already happened with the 5D II. I read today that Canon has released a statement acknowledging that they are looking into two issues: “black dots” that appear to the right of bright highlights in some images and banding issues that appear when certain settings are used. Based on my previous experience with Canon, I’m confident that they will resolve these issues, but I would just as soon wait until after that happens.
Why pay list price? You don’t have to be an economist to know that the price of an item will be higher when the demand is highest. When a new product is released, typically after a marketing buildup and plenty of “buzz,” there are many buyers who are so excited that they will pay almost anything to get it. Now. No matter what. The manufacturers and retailers are willing to oblige them. ;-) You can get one of the first copies of a camera like this, but you are almost certain to pay a premium for the privilege. If you need the camera right now you don’t have much choice. But if you already have a camera that can produce fine images (like my current 5D) there is little rational reason to buy immediately at the higher price. In a few months we’ll undoubtedly see the price begin to drop.
Here’s my bottom line on the 5D II: I think that it looks like a really fine camera. It provides a very compelling feature set at a very reasonable price. If I didn’t already have a good camera that serves me pretty well, I’d probably plan to pick one up fairly soon. However, I’ll wait until the initial bugs have been identified and fixed in the manufacturing process and until the price softens a bit.
