D7100 for landscape photography/long exposures

adox66

Senior Member
In situations like this, small changes can make a very big difference. For one, you absolutely need to cover the viewfinder when taking long exposures, even if the light coming from behind you seems small or non-existent. Remember, it's additive, so even the smallest amount of light over time will have an impact. Secondly, LR noise reduction is nice but is far from state of the art. For times like this with extremely long exposures, you need something a little stronger than LR. I use Nik's Dfine and believe it is probably the best product on the market for long exposure noise.

And I do remember your post and though I'm not an authorized Nikon repair technician, I do not believe you have hot pixels (at least not the kind of hot pixels I think of when I hear the words "hot pixel"). But if you are convinced you do have a hot pixel issue, send it to Nikon asap. But before you go dropping a large chunk of cash on a new camera, I would revisit your long exposure technique and see if these small changes can't make enough of a difference to obviate your need for a new camera body.

I will take the advice above and put it into practice. Will also investigate Niks Dfine and look at purchasing it.

Yes perhaps im wrong in using the term hot pixels as they are not in every shot and not necessarily in the same position in the long exposures though they do have those same characteristics, sparkling different coloured shining pixels.

My my intention to upgrade to the D7100 has been on my mind for a while. I'm not upgrading to try and get away from this issue, I'm upgrading because I want the extra features that the D7100 offers. This originated really because my noise issue was becoming more prevalent in my thoughts and wanted to hear people's experiences of using it for long exposures.

I suppose my issue was/is - is there an issue with my D3200 sensor,or is it behaving normally and the level of noise or whatever it is comes with the territory and has to be put up with or worked on in PP, or do I need to work on my technique to greatly reduce this noise issue I see.

I was was concerned that this level of noise may be something that comes with the nikon cropped sensors and would have no improvement on the D7100.

This place is my only real place for information. Although I am member of a small local camera group, they are all Canon shooters so have no experience with Nikon and they don't seem to have the same issues I am having.

Finally thanks for your feedback. It's greatly appreciated.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Hi Dave,

i m getting a lot of noise/hot pixels in exposures that are 30 seconds or longer. I did start another thread on it with an example, although the shot I put up was long one, perhaps 15 minutes or something, so maybe an extreme example.

I've just had a look at a 120 second exposure that my wife did with her D7100. At ISO 200 which isn't actually base ISO it doesn't look noisy to me. I don't think it would be noticeably different off my D800 in that respect. Are you doing a proper good exposure or do you recover it by increasing the exposure or shadows in Lightroom? I often see posts when people say this camera or that camera is rubbish at ISO 3200/6400 and when you dig deeper they've pulled two stops of exposure back because they under exposed to get the shutter speed they wanted. Just a thought. I think this answers your original question anyway.
 

adox66

Senior Member
I've just had a look at a 120 second exposure that my wife did with her D7100. At ISO 200 which isn't actually base ISO it doesn't look noisy to me. I don't think it would be noticeably different off my D800 in that respect. Are you doing a proper good exposure or do you recover it by increasing the exposure or shadows in Lightroom? I often see posts when people say this camera or that camera is rubbish at ISO 3200/6400 and when you dig deeper they've pulled two stops of exposure back because they under exposed to get the shutter speed they wanted. Just a thought. I think this answers your original question anyway.

Thanks Geoff. Some of them may have been under exposed and certainly shadows may have been increased. Using a 10 stop on the 30'second + shots so getting the exposure spot on has been somewhat of a calculated guess at times and until recently the foreground certainly may have been underexposed with the shadows increased to pull back the detail. Even at that though I have had noise in the top corners of the image as well. I've recently added a two stop hard grad to my arsenal, so that is helping balance out the exposure throughout the image.

Since cel I have noticed it I have sort of gone looking for it, zooming in 100% to check the image. A very experienced shooter in my photo group reckons it could be a sensor problem in the camera, which sort of made me look for it more and contributed to making me think there may be an issue.

I need to have a good look at the raw originals to see if they are, and by how much under exposed. I'm away until at least Friday for Christmas so don't have access to them until then. I'll try and report back at the weekend with my findings.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Thanks Geoff. Some of them may have been under exposed and certainly shadows may have been increased. Using a 10 stop on the 30'second + shots so getting the exposure spot on has been somewhat of a calculated guess at times and until recently the foreground certainly may have been underexposed with the shadows increased to pull back the detail. Even at that though I have had noise in the top corners of the image as well. I've recently added a two stop hard grad to my arsenal, so that is helping balance out the exposure throughout the image.

Since cel I have noticed it I have sort of gone looking for it, zooming in 100% to check the image. A very experienced shooter in my photo group reckons it could be a sensor problem in the camera, which sort of made me look for it more and contributed to making me think there may be an issue.

I need to have a good look at the raw originals to see if they are, and by how much under exposed. I'm away until at least Friday for Christmas so don't have access to them until then. I'll try and report back at the weekend with my findings.

The other thing to consider is viewing at 100%. On these very high res sensors 100% is a huge picture that will show any blemish. I tend to look at my D800 images at 1:2 when I'm being realistic.

For your landscapes try exposing to the right for your highlights and then add 1 or 2 stops which will still not blow them. The camera meter is good for 30 second exposures. On a ten stop I measure without the filter then use an iPhone long exposure calculator to work out the exposure.

One other thing is light leakage. On the 7100 it leaks from the eyepiece if it's uncovered on long exposures. On my D300s it leaks from the focus assist lamp. This is visible at 30 secs.
 

adox66

Senior Member
Just thought Id give a quick update on this after changing cameras.

Firstly, I`m delighted with the D7100. Love having most of the settings available at the touch of a button.

Although Ive had the camera about 3 weeks now, it was only at the weekend that I got a chance to take some long exposures with it.

The good news is the images were nice and clean, noise wise, with none of the issues I was having with the D3200. Now whether that is down to the camera body or improved technique, or a combination of both, I dont know, but suffice to say I am very happy.

I did have a little panic initially when I noticed a red band across some of the long exposures. It was around the middle of the frame and went the whole way across, not in all of them and the ones that it was in was at varying degrees.

Anyway, yesterday when at home(after being on a day trip away with the camera shooting on Saturday) I thought I would investigate more and see if I could reproduce this red band and indeed find a source of the problem.

I took the camera out the back garden and took some 30 second shots of a grey brick wall with a 10 stop filter. Straight away the band was there. I was going to work my way from the front and try and cancel out causes, starting with the filter, then looking at the lens and finally the body.

i checked the big stopper for any flaws etc or breaks in the seal, which may be letting light in but everything was fine. Also checked I was threading the filter correctly into the holder, that it wasnt at an angle, with one side sitting in the nearest slot and the other side accidentally in the outer slot, but all was fine there.

Then it dawned on me. maybe it was light leakage from the viewfinder. Although I dont think I ever had that issue with the D3200, I remembered reading about being advised to cover it on here.

Took the same shot again with my hand covering the viewfinder and hey presto, perfectly exposed image with zero red banding.
I was actually delighted that it was something small like that and not something more serious.

I presume this is normal for this body? I will certainly have to cover the viewfinder constantly with any long exposures. Its not a big deal but just want to make sure this is perfectly normal for this camera? I am a little confused as to how light is leaking in through the viewfinder when the camera is shooting in Live View, thus "closing" the viewfinder.

Also the included eyepiece cover in the box looks like it would be a bit of a pain to use. I`m thinking of just improvising, use a bit of card or blue tac or even my hand. What are you guys using to cover the viewfinder(presuming like me, you do have to cover it).
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I`m thinking of just improvising, use a bit of card or blue tac or even my hand. What are you guys using to cover the viewfinder(presuming like me, you do have to cover it).
Your problem is a common one, and no... It's not just your camera make or model. The simple solution is to cover the eyepiece as you've already figured out. When I do long exposures like that I use a lens cap to cover the viewfinder, or throw a ball cap over the back of my camera. It ain't rocket science so just use whatever you have on-hand.

.....
 
Last edited:

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Doesn't the 7100 have that viewfinder flap? For some reason I thought I remembered the 7000 having one, no?

It comes with a little plastic cover you insert into the viewfinder's frame, yes; it's much like the cover for the hot-shoe. I find they're a PITA to keep track of, though, so I don't bother trying.

....
 

Dave_W

The Dude
It comes with a little plastic cover you insert into the viewfinder's frame, yes; it's much like the cover for the hot-shoe. I find they're a PITA to keep track of, though, so I don't bother trying.

....

There isn't a little switch on the left hand side of the viewfinder that brings an internal flap up and down? I guess not if they supply a plastic doohicky.
 

adox66

Senior Member
There isn't a little switch on the left hand side of the viewfinder that brings an internal flap up and down? I guess not if they supply a plastic doohicky.

Think they are only a feature in the pro bodies, ones with round viewfinder seem to have this feature.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
There isn't a little switch on the left hand side of the viewfinder that brings an internal flap up and down? I guess not if they supply a plastic doohicky.

We're flap negative on the D7100. No flaps, no rudder, no ailerons...

It's a wonder these things manage to get off the freaking ground all all!!
 

Ron Carlson

Senior Member
I shoot landscapes and low light. There is some grain in low light conditions. The D7100 Sensor is slightly larger than the 3200. The 7100 can shoot in 14 bit RAW over 12 bit and lossless compressed, so you have more room to play with in post processing in Camera Raw or Lightroom which is an advantage over the 3200. My suggestion is for you to rent one for a weekend or so. Borrow Lenses rents the 7100: $55.00 for 3 days or $79.00 for a whole week. I would also suggest browsing "The best of D7100" thread started by Don Kuykendall for good examples of all types of shots with the 7100.
[h=3]Best of the D7100[/h]
 
Top