Equestrian photos in low light

[sieverst]

I am trying to find a camera that will take good pictures of my daughter horseback riding in a dim arena. I have an older Olympus DSLR that isn't giving me good results because it wants to use the flash (no flashes allowed). Not sure if it could be tweaked as it is about 6-7 years old.

I was considering the Nikon 1 J4 because it captures 20 fps. Would that work or should I invest in a newer DSLR? My budget is $900 or less.
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner, but I am no expert either.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Mark S Abeln]

I am trying to find a camera that will take good pictures of my daughter horseback riding in a dim arena. I have an older Olympus DSLR that isn't giving me good results because it wants to use the flash (no flashes allowed). Not sure if it could be tweaked as it is about 6-7 years old.

I was considering the Nikon 1 J4 because it captures 20 fps. Would that work or should I invest in a newer DSLR? My budget is $900 or less.
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner, but I am no expert either.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

You might want to take a look at this list of recommendations:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/89...t-interchangeable-lens-cameras-for-under-1000

These cameras should give you good low-light performance, but good fast lenses are also important for this purpose.

 

[John Deerfield]

My budget is $900 or less.

With that budget you aren't going to get much. As an example, here is what many consider to be the go to low light sports lens:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/680103-USA/Canon_2751B002_EF_70_200mm_f_2_8L_IS.html

At $2200 (no camera included), the lens alone is well over your $900 budget. And the lens is what transmits the light to the camera. Cheaper lenses can transmit four times less light (or more). Kind of a problem when there is a low intensity of light.

With that kind of budget, I would look into decent point and shoot cameras, maybe something like this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ..._fz1000k_lumix_dmc_fz1000_digital_camera.html

 

[BCshutterbug]

I wonder if a mirrorless camera system might work for you? They do well in low light, albeit not as well as full DSLR. I own a Sony a6000 and it will shoot 11fps. They offer AF, although not as fast as a DSLR. However, your budget would get you a mirrorless APS-C camera with lenses and accessories. Some mirrorless cameras have a micro 4/3 (four thirds) sensor and even less expensive lenses, although I can't speak to their performance under low light conditions.

The smaller lenses generally means a little smaller price point. The a6000 with or without the kit lens and 55-210 telephoto are $250 off through Sony right now.

I think it depends in part what kind of equestrian activities your daughter does. Is she a jumper? Dressage? Barrel racing? In the low lighting you described, I could probably get passable photos (even better in post processing) of dressage and possibly even jumping, but barrel racing could be tricky, given how quickly all the good stuff happens.

Good luck on your quest!!
Mary

 

[Skipper494]

Samsung NX20 w/18-55 lens. Add the 45f1.8 (not the 2d/3d).

 

[Bjorn_L]

I am trying to find a camera that will take good pictures of my daughter horseback riding in a dim arena. I have an older Olympus DSLR that isn't giving me good results because it wants to use the flash (no flashes allowed). Not sure if it could be tweaked as it is about 6-7 years old.

I was considering the Nikon 1 J4 because it captures 20 fps. Would that work or should I invest in a newer DSLR? My budget is $900 or less.
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner, but I am no expert either.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

At 900 or less, you are budget challenged to put together a system for low light sports photos. Given that scenario I’d suggest a DSLR and as decent a lens as you can swing.

Ideally you’d get something like a 70-200 f/2.8 lens (which costs $1000) and a Nikon d7200 (which costs 1500). If you think you’ll have the ability to build a system later maybe a Nikon d7100 body only for 713 and a 55-300 for around 205 would put you very close to being on budget but would not leave you any money for a fast SD card … so add 15 to the above so just under 950 and later buy a normal lens like the 18-140. And eventually replace the 55-300 with the more sports friendly 70-200.

If you want a “one and done” type of shopping trip, the Nikon d5200 kit with the 18-140 lens is 677 + the 55-300 for 205 and a memory card for 15 and you’re done 897.

All prices quoted are used prices from Amazon.com. Used is the only way I see for you to get the capabilities you describe and stay close to on budget. I quoted only Nikon because of the cameras that are better in low light only Nikon has sports lenses in their lineup. Also they are about the least cost method get this done with a reasonable level of quality.

 

[W Steffey]

With a little more than 35 years of trying to take usable (not even good) photos of a moving horse in a dim covered arena without flash, I rarely even try today. Even photographers with more experience will not try without flash. Flash does not seem to upset horses, but often annoys riders. Your best bet is to try and find a small portion of the arena with natural light coming in from a door, skylight or an open side, prefocus, and wait for the horse to pass through. If you still want to try from the middle of the ring (digital photos are cheap), turn your back to any open side and shoot towards the shade. Shooting towards incoming light will defeat your meter.

A tripod in the ring with horses is a invitation to disaster, but you might get away with one in the stands or from outside the rail. Your shutter will be very slow, so camera shake is a real problem if the camera is handheld. Wait for a time when the horses are moving relatively slowly.

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.

Good luck

 

[Doss]

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.
Good luck

Finally! Someone's mentioned it! ISO.

Forget about high fps, and all that baloney (what's worse: 11 blurry shots per second or just one!?! )

Just to expand on what W Steffey wrote: Turn the ISO up as high as it will go with a noise/grain level that is acceptable to you (for most people, with a 7 year old micro 4/3, that's probably around ISO 1600) The RAW processing and noise-reduction will eek the most image quality available from your camera's sensor.

Also use your lens with the aperture at the widest settings

Obviously you want a high enough shutter speed. But also try 'panning' shots as these will allow to capture movement AND use slower speeds (though it's not so easy with the vertical&horizontal movement of horses)

If it's still too dark then you may have to consider a camera with considerably better high ISO abilities, and/or a lens with a faster aperture. But, as aforementioned, not easy within your budget - and even then, it may be too dark.
If you just want the one shot to add to the family album then you may be better off borrowing/renting some pro gear for the day

 

[D Cox]

With a little more than 35 years of trying to take usable (not even good) photos of a moving horse in a dim covered arena without flash, I rarely even try today. Even photographers with more experience will not try without flash. Flash does not seem to upset horses, but often annoys riders. Your best bet is to try and find a small portion of the arena with natural light coming in from a door, skylight or an open side, prefocus, and wait for the horse to pass through. If you still want to try from the middle of the ring (digital photos are cheap), turn your back to any open side and shoot towards the shade. Shooting towards incoming light will defeat your meter.

A tripod in the ring with horses is a invitation to disaster, but you might get away with one in the stands or from outside the rail. Your shutter will be very slow, so camera shake is a real problem if the camera is handheld. Wait for a time when the horses are moving relatively slowly.

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.

Good luck

Sounds like a job for a Sony A7s at a very high ISO setting.

 

[tedolf]

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.

Good luck

Finally! Someone's mentioned it! ISO.

Forget about high fps, and all that baloney (what's worse: 11 blurry shots per second or just one!?! )

Just to expand on what W Steffey wrote: Turn the ISO up as high as it will go with a noise/grain level that is acceptable to you (for most people, with a 7 year old micro 4/3, that's probably around ISO 1600) The RAW processing and noise-reduction will eek the most image quality available from your camera's sensor.

Also use your lens with the aperture at the widest settings

Obviously you want a high enough shutter speed. But also try 'panning' shots as these will allow to capture movement AND use slower speeds (though it's not so easy with the vertical&horizontal movement of horses)

If it's still too dark then you may have to consider a camera with considerably better high ISO abilities, and/or a lens with a faster aperture. But, as aforementioned, not easy within your budget - and even then, it may be too dark.
If you just want the one shot to add to the family album then you may be better off borrowing/renting some pro gear for the day

Doss is right.

This is a very challenging situation. Probably a full frame dSLR with good ISO 3200 and a fast long zoom is going to be required. Renting is an ideal solution.

TEdolph

 

[Bjorn_L]

With a little more than 35 years of trying to take usable (not even good) photos of a moving horse in a dim covered arena without flash, I rarely even try today. Even photographers with more experience will not try without flash. Flash does not seem to upset horses, but often annoys riders. Your best bet is to try and find a small portion of the arena with natural light coming in from a door, skylight or an open side, prefocus, and wait for the horse to pass through. If you still want to try from the middle of the ring (digital photos are cheap), turn your back to any open side and shoot towards the shade. Shooting towards incoming light will defeat your meter.

A tripod in the ring with horses is a invitation to disaster, but you might get away with one in the stands or from outside the rail. Your shutter will be very slow, so camera shake is a real problem if the camera is handheld. Wait for a time when the horses are moving relatively slowly.

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.

Good luck

Sounds like a job for a Sony A7s at a very high ISO setting.

In this case the lenses and such would play just as big a role. The a7s has remarkable low ISO noise, but lacks sports lenses like a d750 or d4s would be able to make use of.

 

[Bjorn_L]

With a little more than 35 years of trying to take usable (not even good) photos of a moving horse in a dim covered arena without flash, I rarely even try today. Even photographers with more experience will not try without flash. Flash does not seem to upset horses, but often annoys riders. Your best bet is to try and find a small portion of the arena with natural light coming in from a door, skylight or an open side, prefocus, and wait for the horse to pass through. If you still want to try from the middle of the ring (digital photos are cheap), turn your back to any open side and shoot towards the shade. Shooting towards incoming light will defeat your meter.

A tripod in the ring with horses is a invitation to disaster, but you might get away with one in the stands or from outside the rail. Your shutter will be very slow, so camera shake is a real problem if the camera is handheld. Wait for a time when the horses are moving relatively slowly.

Because you will have to use the highest ISO your camera can handle, shoot RAW, then learn to add noise filters selectively to portions of the photo than need it.

Good luck

Which is why I suggested the highest ISO solution his budget allowed. Also not mentioned in your post is the need for fast lenses. An f/2.8 (or faster) lens.

I've gotten some "ok" results using an older full frame (d700) and a 70-200 f/2.8 in some fairly dim places including an equestrian event, but nothing to brag about.

Something like a used d600 would be better but it would put him over budget, particularly if you factor in the lenses. If we accept that his budget is his budget than the kit I suggested in my previous post gets him as close as he is going to get on that budget. If you look at the noise levels at ISO 3200 here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7100/13 turn off NR so you see what is going on and not what is smeared away you'll note that the d7100 is reasonably good at iso 1600 and ok at iso 3200. The other issue of course is loss of DR as you push the ISO through the roof. The only work around there is a better lens and/or adding light.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

I am trying to find a camera that will take good pictures of my daughter horseback riding in a dim arena. I have an older Olympus DSLR that isn't giving me good results because it wants to use the flash (no flashes allowed). Not sure if it could be tweaked as it is about 6-7 years old.

I was considering the Nikon 1 J4 because it captures 20 fps. Would that work or should I invest in a newer DSLR? My budget is $900 or less.
I wouldn't consider myself a beginner, but I am no expert either.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

At 900 or less, you are budget challenged to put together a system for low light sports photos. Given that scenario I’d suggest a DSLR and as decent a lens as you can swing.

Ideally you’d get something like a 70-200 f/2.8 lens (which costs $1000) and a Nikon d7200 (which costs 1500). If you think you’ll have the ability to build a system later maybe a Nikon d7100 body only for 713 and a 55-300 for around 205 would put you very close to being on budget but would not leave you any money for a fast SD card … so add 15 to the above so just under 950 and later buy a normal lens like the 18-140. And eventually replace the 55-300 with the more sports friendly 70-200.

If you want a “one and done” type of shopping trip, the Nikon d5200 kit with the 18-140 lens is 677 + the 55-300 for 205 and a memory card for 15 and you’re done 897.

All prices quoted are used prices from Amazon.com. Used is the only way I see for you to get the capabilities you describe and stay close to on budget. I quoted only Nikon because of the cameras that are better in low light only Nikon has sports lenses in their lineup. Also they are about the least cost method get this done with a reasonable level of quality.

I don't normally agree with Bjorn recommending "used" equipment, (because they often don't have the experience to even know if they are 100% operational or without problems).

But in this case I have to agree that could be the only possible way to get FF level ISO, (and phase-detection AF).

Bjorn also often suggests the RX10 and I would also have to accept that as a (possible but not probable) option better than what I usually recommend. (albeit the zoom might not be sufficient even if the light was sufficient)

 

[Jacques Cornell]

So far, some valuable advice in this thread. I'll just raise another consideration, which is distance. The farther away you are, the greater the challenge, because you'll need a longer (more expensive and/or less bright) lens and a faster shutter speed (requiring higher ISO).

If you are 100' away and want to fill half the frame with the horse, you'll need at least a 200mm equivalent lens and a shutter speed of 1/500 or faster. For this, there's no way around it: you're looking at a used D700 and 70-200mm f2.8 at the very minimum, and even this combo is well above your budget. You'll also want a tripod and good panning technique.

On the other hand, if you can shoot from ringside when your daughter is 20'-30' away, something like an 85mm equivalent fast prime might give you enough reach with the speed (brightness) you need. I shoot low-light events (not sports, though) professionally with m43 gear, and I suspect that under these conditions you might do well with an E-M5 or GX7 and, say, an Olympus 45mm f1.8 or Panasonic 42.5mm f1.7 prime lens. You can get one of these combos new today for right around $900. Detail is still good from these cameras at ISO 3200, and 6400 is OK if you don't underexpose, have a fast enough shutter speed, and you're not making prints bigger than 11"x14".

Also, while DSLRs are better at tracking focus than most mirrorless cameras, I find the single AF of my GX7 so fast, even in low light, that I have no trouble getting in-focus shots of subjects moving slowly close-up or fast at a distance.

 

[sieverst]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

 

[Bjorn_L]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

Ideally you want fast focusing, good motion tracking, and very good performance in low light from both the lens and the camera.

I'd suggest a Nikon d750 and a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

The d750 is not only excellent in low light due to low noise it is also particularly good at focusing in low light. The Nikon 70-200 lens is f/2.8 which is reasonably large aperture and should give you a combination of good depth of field and still take in a lot of light.

The first time you rent it, try to get a few extra days so you can practice. You'll most likely need to be in manual mode (for exposure). You'll probably need a shutter speed in the 1/400 to 1/800 range. I'd start with 1/500. You'll probably need an ISO of around 3200-6400. Start with ISO 4000 and adjust. Aperture. You'll probably settle on f/2.8 to f/4 depending on how much of the scene you want in focus, I'd suggest starting at f/2.8 and increasing aperture until you're happy with the DOF.

Exposure has 3 variables:

Aperture. The smaller the f-number, the more light gets let in but the thinner the DOF.

Shutter Speed. The slower the shutter speed , the more light gets in but the more subject to motion blur.

ISO. The larger the ISO value, the more the light gets amplified but the more noise and the less dynamic range a photo has.

It is not complex or hard to learn, but when renting it does present a challenge if you don't already know it.

 

[Jacques Cornell]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

Ideally you want fast focusing, good motion tracking, and very good performance in low light from both the lens and the camera.

I'd suggest a Nikon d750 and a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

I'm very keen to hear where one can get this for $900.

 

[W Steffey]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

Ideally you want fast focusing, good motion tracking, and very good performance in low light from both the lens and the camera.

I'd suggest a Nikon d750 and a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

I'm very keen to hear where one can get this for $900.

 

[Bjorn_L]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

Ideally you want fast focusing, good motion tracking, and very good performance in low light from both the lens and the camera.

I'd suggest a Nikon d750 and a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

I'm very keen to hear where one can get this for $900.

You should read the question I was responding to again. It is quoted above. I've underlined the key parts.

 

[Bjorn_L]

Thank you all for such great advice. Since I can't afford to buy the setup I will need, I will rent some equipment. With renting, what camera and lenses would you recommend? I can get close to the rail, so distance isn't as much the issue as is capturing the speed in low light since flash is not allowed. My daughter does walk/trot classes. No barrel racing or I would just give up!

Really appreciate the advice, as I am still learning. Tina

Ideally you want fast focusing, good motion tracking, and very good performance in low light from both the lens and the camera.

I'd suggest a Nikon d750 and a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII

I'm very keen to hear where one can get this for $900.

--
The way to make a friend is to act like one.
www.jacquescornell.photography

Come on people, this lady seems to be a horse "soccer mom", now a wanna-be professional.

Personally, I would recommend a Panasonic FZ200, now for less than $400 everywhere. The constant f2.8 should do at least OK in the arena, and also be a really good family camera for years.

The fz200 has a tiny sensor and so does not do well in the dark. Would you consider an APS-C sensor a low light solution if it were on an f/10 lens? Well the f/2.8 on the fz200 is equivalent to around f/10.2 on APS-C or f/15.5 on full frame. That is all the light that little sensor is being given to work with.

If you look at ISO noise in comparison to a consumer DSLR:

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...00-versus-Panasonic-LUMIX-DMC-FZ200___998_818

The fz200 is 3.7 stops behind. Which means with a consumer 5.6 zoom like the one I recommended for $200 bucks is still going be taking in 6.6x as much light.

The FZ200 is a terrible solution for this sort of thing. People get caught up in the fact that it has a f/2.8 lens and forget it has a crappy little sensor.

Also your post seems to imply that you just followed the lead of the above poster and never bothered to read that she was now asking about rental not purchase. Which is why I moved from a consumer solution to one truly suitable to the task.

I'm not entirely convinced that renting will give her enough time to learn how to use it, but that is not what she asked. She might well be better off buying what I originally suggested.

--
See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.