PDA

View Full Version : Which camera for shooting architectural lighting? Low light, no flash?


Shipwrecked
03-11-2008, 10:04 PM
Hi,

I'm an architectural lighting designer. I design the lighting for restaurants, lounges, night clubs, retail stores, museums, etc...

When I need to shoot one of my project for my records, I generally borrow my co-worker's Cannon EOS and bring a tripod.

But a lot of my job involves researching other venues/projects.

In order to know what else is happening in the industry and discuss the market intelligently with clients, I need to be able to take shots of other projects. I need to take pictures of buildings, restaurants, lounges, etc... on the fly, whenever I happen to see something great.

My needs:

1. I need a compact or subcompact camera that can fit in my pocket so I can keep it with me. (I'm a tall guy though, so I have relatively large pockets!)

2. I need a camera that performs reasonably well in low-level environments. Image stabilization, fairly high ISO, etc... I've read that CCD sensors are helpful with this.
As I'm usually trying to capture some sense of the lighting I see, I have to shoot without a flash. I often carry a mini tripod in my coat, but there are times when I can't whip that out. I realize that SLRs are the better tool for low-lighting, but I need something for reference images.

3. I need some manual control of the exposure settings. Most of the auto settings don't respond well to what I usually shoot.

4. I'd prefer something with a wider lens. Many of the spaces I see are fairly tight. A wide lens is very helpful here (I'd prefer 28mm equivalent over 35mm).

---those are my major concerns---

Other wishes:
- I'd like it to shoot video clips - I often come across dynamic treatments with changing light levels. Video is helpful with these.

- I'd like good image quality for screen-sized viewing. I often take daylight shots that need to be manipulated for photoshop renderings, so resolution is helpful, but in general most shots are for research images.

- Besides the aforementioned renderings, I don't often blow images up or print.

- Budget isn't a huge concern. I want a good value for the money, but I'm entertaining options between about $200 and $600.

- I occasionally need to zoom in on something, but more often, as I said, I need a wider shot.

I've had several Sony Cybershots over the years. I like that the better ones have manual control and tend to render colors well (IMO) but they all kept having problems and breaking after about a year or so. After three of them I got the hint and now I'm trying to avoid Sony.

I'm generally impressed by the Lumix LX1 and LX2, but not necessarily sold on them.

Any other ideas would be greatly appreciated!!!

Thank you!

KCook
03-12-2008, 11:04 PM
Compact cameras and low light are always a thin subject. But here is a link to an extensive thread on these choices - Christmas Time calls for a nice Point & Shoot camera on my wishlist. (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36101)

Kelly Cook

speaklightly
03-12-2008, 11:31 PM
Shipwrecked-

You might take a look at the Fuji S-6000. It has the W/A and low light capability, but no IS.

Sarah Joyce

shahmatt
03-13-2008, 01:50 AM
Just to check. Will you be shooting any moving objects at all? Or is your photography going to be restricted to mostly static architectural stuff?

In dim light, the camera requires more time to expose an image properly, which can result in a blurry image either from:
1. Hand-shake
2. Subject movement.

There are two ways to fix this problem (without using a flash):

1. Stop your camera from moving by using Image stabilization: This just keeps your camera stable (not your subject). So if your subject isn't moving, IS will help you get a nice sharp image. Basically the same effect as a tripod.

2. Increase your shutter speed by increasing ISO: Since shutter speed is fast, the image will come out sharp. The downside is that increasing the ISO actually means upping the sensitivity of the image-capturing CCD (which you mentioned earlier), which generally leads to noisier (grainier) images. So there's a loss in image quality. To date, within the non-DSLR world, only Fuji have managed to make CCD's that do well with the higher ISO's. Most DSLR's have excellent high ISO quality.

For option 1, The LX2 might do, but beware of poor high ISO image quality (see review here: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_lx2-review/). Also look at the Pan TZ5 or Canon S5 IS or A720IS.

For option 2, the Fuji S6500 (as suggested by Sarah) is an excellent choice, but I don't know how available it is right now. It is a large camera however. You could also consider the Olympus E420 (touted as smallest DSLR in the world), though no review is out yet.