Please help me with long distance beam shots.

I have a 2-3 year old Canon DSLR and I can’t take pictures of long distance beam shots for crap. I’m using this lens. What do I need to do? It’s mounted on a tripod. Manual focus. ISO400. White balance set to daytime (5200k). And the pictures are all blurry. Takes like 10 seconds to take the picture.

What is the distance? 250mm is not much of a long lens for any long distance shots.

Manual mode, set the shutter speed manually, to 4 seconds for starters and increase if the picture is too dim, so you control the shutter time, not the camera. Use a good, sturdy tripod, or you will get fuzzy results and that goes for the light too. It must be held very still as in, on a tripod also. Might also want a remote shutter for it, so you don't move anything, or use the delayed release timer, so it fires after you have moved your hand away.

DSLR should get good results, but you may need a longer lens if you are very far away, as in over 250 yards.

Yeah, I’m shooting further than 250 yards. Any suggestions on a cheapish long distance lens?

Listen to what OL says about delayed shutter, it’s especially important if your tripod isn’t rock solid. If you’re not using it, it’s probably why they’re blurry. Another thing to consider, do you really care how grainy the picture is? If not take the ISO to 800 and you can speed up your shutter.

That lens has a pretty small aperture once you zoom in, so night shots will not be its strong suit.

After you take the steps O L suggested, You might have to increase ISO to 1600. Are the shots blurry or out of focus?

I can’t do it tonight but I may post up the pictures tomorrow. Blurry. Lots of artifact too, then again the beetles were dive bombing me and the light

To tell the truth, it would be cheaper to pick up a used Canon or Sony Mega-zoom Point and Shoot camera, than to buy an expensive lens for that one and it would do just as good for beam shots. Most of them have anti shake built in and good, used ones can go a lot less than a good Canon lens and you can also shoot more like F4.5, so it's not stopped down as far as the 250mm probably is. Other than that, I don't know. I haven't messed with DSLR cameras for a long time.

I forgot to mention, when tripod mounted, turn off the IS. It helps get sharper images.
I would also hold off on any new lens purchase till Dale chimes in. I think he’s got a lot experience in doing beam shots.

Doh, I just remembered and I don’t know if it’ll make a difference but that lens has a UV filter on it.

It’ll help to take it off, more light will come in, but I doubt it’ll be a huge difference unless the filter is of very poor quality.

My daughter has a Nikon Coolpix L320 that she used for her digital photography class last semester in high school. Do you think it would work?

UV fitter has an imperceptible effect on exposure. So low you won’t be able to measure it.

Even really poor quality ones? Would it be unreasonable to think they could have a 5% or higher loss rate?

The most precise light meter I ever had access to was accurate to one sixteenth of a stop and UV filter wouldn’t show up. So if there are losses it should be less.

So no it won’t be unreasonable to assume 5% or less. But in photo exposure 5% is not even a factor

Thanks, I hadn’t considered how small 5% is when thinking of it in f stops.