Disappointed with noise levels....
What are the advantages to increasing iso, when on a tripod why not keep to lower iso?
thanks
Fraser
I did try and take a shot with ISO100 but the file came out way under-exposed.
Pentax K20D, Pentax 18-55mm II, Pentax M 50mm 1: 1.7, Super Paragon 1: 2.8 24mm Macro, Pentax smc DA 50-200 mm F4-5.6 ED
my flickr
buy images
If i can learn from this, it'll be much appreciated.
Pentax K20D, Pentax 18-55mm II, Pentax M 50mm 1: 1.7, Super Paragon 1: 2.8 24mm Macro, Pentax smc DA 50-200 mm F4-5.6 ED
my flickr
buy images
do i not need to shoot in Bulb mode to get a 60 second exposure
Yes you do, according to the exif you where at f14? (seems slightly odd in itself) however had you set your aperture to f8 a 30 second exposure ' ISO200 should have been ok
K5 + 8mm-500mm zooms and primes
Please feel free to play with any images I post.
My flickr: link
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Pentax K20D, Pentax 18-55mm II, Pentax M 50mm 1: 1.7, Super Paragon 1: 2.8 24mm Macro, Pentax smc DA 50-200 mm F4-5.6 ED
my flickr
buy images
The benefits of smaller apertures up to about f11 are wider depth of field which helps ensuring sharpness in landscape shots but beyond this there are typically negative consequences.
My own night shots are taken at ISO100 or 200 and generally i begin taking shots whilst there is still some colour in the sky. Usually i begin at 15 or 20 seconds at between F16-F22, gradually increasing the exposure time to 30 secs and widening the aperture to around F11 until the sky becomes too dark. Very occasionally i might use an exposure of several minutes if i am using a 1m Candlepower torch as illumination for the subject.
Regards - Pete
why is f14 odd?
It's not odd but not needed in with this photo since the only focus point is the castle.
Here play with this a bit link
With f/11 at 18mm you can get 1.87m in front of you till the horizon in focus, a bit over kill in this shot.
Even with f/5.6 you can get 2.57 meter till the horizon in focus so you could easily have shot this shot with ISO100.
Besides that the noise is there most likely because the sky is one flat surface, it does not show up for example in the building since you've other things going on there, with a decent noise reduction program you can clean the noise quite a lot.
Here what do you think?

Stefan

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Stefan's effort is about as good as it gets, I think.
Regards,
Andrew
Best wishes,
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Yves (another one of those crazy Canucks)
You could have used multiple exposure. It would have helped with the noise issue. Each exposure would have been shorter, but the combined total time would more or less have been the same.
You could make them from even length and "mean" out the noise, that's very effective.
Stefan

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
PeterMac
Member
Scotland
I was lucky enough to stay here last night and headed out in the dark armed with camera and tripod. I'm pretty un-impressed, and surprised, with the noise levels. I shot it at ISO400, but what i see here is levels of noise that i'd normally associate with at least ISO800. Should i have shot at a lesser sensitivity setting? I've shot low light before and not noticed anything near this bad.
Tigh Mor at night
Noise!!!
Pentax K20D, Pentax 18-55mm II, Pentax M 50mm 1: 1.7, Super Paragon 1: 2.8 24mm Macro, Pentax smc DA 50-200 mm F4-5.6 ED
my flickr
buy images