Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 11 Aug 2009 (Tuesday) 23:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

I'm torn... low light dilemma

 
kitacanon
Goldmember
4,706 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2006
Location: West Palm Beach
     
Aug 12, 2009 10:12 |  #16

jlrichmond76 wrote in post #8443674 (external link)
I recently was taking pictures at a wedding reception. I was using my 24-105 4L and when they dimmed the lights after dinner, had a HELL of a time with AF focusing on ANYTHING. I've never had that problem before but I don't think the ambient has ever been quite that low in my experience. I was at the slowest shutter and highest ISO I was comfortable with, but had problems.

Here's my question. I also have a 70-200 2.8IS (LOVE IT) but at times it's too long for receptions. Not to mention it weighs a hundred pounds...

Anyway - should I be considering a 24-70 2.8L? Or should I just suck it up and use the zoom? Anyone wanna trade? :P

I don't see the exposure settings you're talking about being uncomfortable with...

I've shot with the 70-210 @ 1/40 sec wide open (3.5-4.5) and have gotten nice results @ ISO 1000 but that's just me...

If you're not happy with the results could be you should go with a 100-135mm prime...lighter and sharper wide @ F2.8
Good luck...


My Canon kit 450D/s90; Canon lenses 18-55 IS, 70-210/3.5-4.5....Nikon kit: D610; 28-105/3.5-4.5, 75-300/4.5-5.6 AF, 50/1.8D Nikkors, Tamron 80-210; MF Nikkors: 50/2K, 50/1.4 AI-S, 50/1.8 SeriesE, 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor (AF locked), 85mm/1.8K-AI, 105/2.5 AIS/P.C, 135/2.8K/Q.C, 180/2.8 ED, 200/4Q/AIS, 300/4.5H-AI, ++ Tamron 70-210/3.8-4, Vivitar/Kiron 28/2, ser.1 70-210/3.5, ser.1 28-90; Vivitar/Komine and Samyang 28/2.8; 35mm Nikon F/FM/FE2, Rebel 2K...HTC RE UWA camera

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alt4852
Goldmember
Avatar
3,419 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Aug 12, 2009 10:28 as a reply to  @ kitacanon's post |  #17

the 24-70 is nice in low light, but when the going gets tough, reach for a prime. if you get get AF lock, either use your flash or buy a ST-E2.


5D4 | Z21 | 35L2 | 50L | 85L2 | 135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,256 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4514
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Aug 12, 2009 10:33 |  #18

jlrichmond76 wrote in post #8443674 (external link)
I recently was taking pictures at a wedding reception. I was using my 24-105 4L and when they dimmed the lights after dinner, had a HELL of a time with AF focusing on ANYTHING. I've never had that problem before but I don't think the ambient has ever been quite that low in my experience. I was at the slowest shutter and highest ISO I was comfortable with, but had problems.

Here's my question. I also have a 70-200 2.8IS (LOVE IT) but at times it's too long for receptions. Not to mention it weighs a hundred pounds...

Anyway - should I be considering a 24-70 2.8L? Or should I just suck it up and use the zoom? Anyone wanna trade? :P

What iso and shutter speed was that?


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
The Chronochromagraph

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jlrichmond76
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
193 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Aug 12, 2009 17:32 |  #19

If your AF can't lock on in low-light, then maybe your eyes won't focus perfectly either??

Exactly. I went with MF but couldn't see enough light thru the view finder to even know if I was focused or not... it was actually that dark. The AF assist on my flash wasn't getting me there. ISO 1600? Wow. I've always had pretty grainy results at that setting. For a wedding, it's just not the image quality that I hope for.

I've been thinking about another prime for some time, too. I've heard the praises of the 85 1.2 for some time now... hmmmmm


Jack of all trades, master of none...

5D / 40D / 10-22 EF-S / 50 1.4 / 24-105 F4 L IS / 70-200 2.8 L IS / 60 EF-S Macro / Quantum T5D-R / Turbo 2x2 / CB Digital Pro-M / QTTL Wireless adapter / memory, etc...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jlrichmond76
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
193 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Aug 12, 2009 17:34 |  #20

Regarding the ISO and shutter... I know a lot of you will laugh at me but I had it at ISO1000 and 1/100 - I've played with it so much and with all the fast movement at the reception, this is where I prefer to go...
Guess I'm a sucker for crisp crispness... :)


Jack of all trades, master of none...

5D / 40D / 10-22 EF-S / 50 1.4 / 24-105 F4 L IS / 70-200 2.8 L IS / 60 EF-S Macro / Quantum T5D-R / Turbo 2x2 / CB Digital Pro-M / QTTL Wireless adapter / memory, etc...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 18
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Aug 12, 2009 21:41 |  #21

jlrichmond76 wrote in post #8443731 (external link)
Crap. That wasn't the answer I was looking for...

I was looking for someone to tell me that the 24-70 would solve all my problems so I could justify spending a grand on another lens... :)

I have no trouble with my 24-70/5d combo, but I use a flash at the reception. Don't know if it's the AF assist or the higher precision of the center point with 2.8. Not sure why the obsession with shooting in available light when there is so little?


Current: 5DM3, 6D, 8mm fish, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 85/1.8, 100-400/IS v1, lensbaby composer with edge 80, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 80D, 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70/2.8, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xhack
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Edinburgh, Lothian
     
Aug 13, 2009 03:00 |  #22

timbop wrote in post #8449853 (external link)
I have no trouble with my 24-70/5d combo, but I use a flash at the reception. Don't know if it's the AF assist or the higher precision of the center point with 2.8. Not sure why the obsession with shooting in available light when there is so little?

As for available light - hereabouts, civil registrars and clergymen generally have no problems with pictures being taken during the vows (the core of the ceremony), but do object to flash at this juncture. That's why a fast lens is useful. Of course, you may well ask why flash is considered distracting, but the clatter of shutters is not . . . . but there ya go . . .

Edit - the above observations apply to the 'official' photographer alone and is the subject of negotiation with the person officiating. Where you do have permission, you do try to be an unobtrusive as possible. My clergyman father was old school and would not allow a camera in the church at all - the place for cameras was outside on the steps!


~ Wallace
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Aug 13, 2009 06:18 |  #23

jlrichmond76 wrote in post #8448697 (external link)
Regarding the ISO and shutter... I know a lot of you will laugh at me but I had it at ISO1000 and 1/100 - I've played with it so much and with all the fast movement at the reception, this is where I prefer to go...
Guess I'm a sucker for crisp crispness... :)

Try taking some shots at ISO1600 with your 5D. If properly exposed the noise is far from objectionable and I HATE noise. It was the main impetus for me to go to a dSLR from a point and shoot (Sony 707).

I posted a few samples here

https://photography-on-the.net …hread.php?t=709​806&page=4


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
randomlinh
Senior Member
Avatar
992 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Maryland
     
Aug 13, 2009 07:06 |  #24

timbop wrote in post #8449853 (external link)
I have no trouble with my 24-70/5d combo, but I use a flash at the reception. Don't know if it's the AF assist or the higher precision of the center point with 2.8. Not sure why the obsession with shooting in available light when there is so little?

The AF assist probably helped quite a bit. It did for me w/ my 40D/17-50/2.8. I basically shot in christmas light lighting at 8pm in mid october. Focus was dead on.

But sometimes, you just can't use flash. Or want a specific shot/style.

To the OP, just get a flash and learn to use it well. AND get a fast prime because it's fun =)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
p32shooter
Senior Member
713 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2007
     
Aug 13, 2009 08:30 |  #25

have the canon 85 f1.8, 50 1.4 and 1.8 and sigma 30 1.4

i love the sigma and the 85 canon, the 50s not so much - boketh is way better on the 30/85


wants for Ls :D , now have 400do;500f4is,600f4 :cool::cool: off to birding and airshows:):):)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 18
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Aug 13, 2009 09:23 |  #26

xhack wrote in post #8451064 (external link)
As for available light - hereabouts, civil registrars and clergymen generally have no problems with pictures being taken during the vows (the core of the ceremony), but do object to flash at this juncture. That's why a fast lens is useful. Of course, you may well ask why flash is considered distracting, but the clatter of shutters is not . . . . but there ya go . . .

Edit - the above observations apply to the 'official' photographer alone and is the subject of negotiation with the person officiating. Where you do have permission, you do try to be an unobtrusive as possible. My clergyman father was old school and would not allow a camera in the church at all - the place for cameras was outside on the steps!

Yes, some officients here in the states object to flash during the ceremony as well. I find that there is usually enough ambient light to go with a 2.8 zoom in these cases, with no focus issue and the participants are standing still so shutter speed isn't so crucial. However, the OP is talking about the reception afterwards - which does require a fast shutter or flash to capture movement. I've never been asked not to use flash in any reception hall, although I know some shooters would prefer to shoot at f/1.2 to get the "mood". I disagree with that position, since the quality of light is often bad and many bands/dj's have flashing lights as part of the ambiance anyway.


Current: 5DM3, 6D, 8mm fish, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 85/1.8, 100-400/IS v1, lensbaby composer with edge 80, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 80D, 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70/2.8, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
37,632 posts
Gallery: 179 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 11870
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Aug 13, 2009 10:17 as a reply to  @ timbop's post |  #27

If you are going to be doing a lot of this don't fear high ISOs and invest in good fast glass.

I shoot a good deal of corporate functions and work in low light no flash all the time at ISOs or 1600 and 3200 and I shoot with a 5D (the first one) Well here...I find all of these exceptable and I can get clean 11X14s no problem.

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_2572.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7578.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7509.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7500.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_4994.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_5093.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_2672.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7811.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
37,632 posts
Gallery: 179 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 11870
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Aug 13, 2009 10:24 as a reply to  @ airfrogusmc's post |  #28

Heres a couple more also I don't shoot wedding and haven't for 10 or so years but I have shot a few since for some very good old clients or really presistant friends. Heres a few of those and some more low light corporate events.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE


IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE


IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7285.jpg

IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_7269.jpg

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE


IMAGE: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/IMG_0080.jpg

JL, I hope this helped



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kitacanon
Goldmember
4,706 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2006
Location: West Palm Beach
     
Aug 14, 2009 10:17 |  #29

jlrichmond76 wrote in post #8448688 (external link)
If your AF can't lock on in low-light, then maybe your eyes won't focus perfectly either??

Exactly. I went with MF but couldn't see enough light thru the view finder to even know if I was focused or not... it was actually that dark. The AF assist on my flash wasn't getting me there. ISO 1600? Wow. I've always had pretty grainy results at that setting. For a wedding, it's just not the image quality that I hope for.

Regarding the ISO and shutter... I know a lot of you will laugh at me but I had it at ISO1000 and 1/100 - I've played with it so much and with all the fast movement at the reception, this is where I prefer to go...
Guess I'm a sucker for crisp crispness...

Something's doesn't seem right here...not you or your shooting, but just the picture in my mind regarding how much/little light you had that you couldn't see through the VF well enough to focus, whether AF or MF....
it seems to me that @ ISO 1000 shooting at 100@ F4, if that was the correct exposure, you should have had plenty of light for AF

I'm posting a couple of shots here from a family gathering, all shot under ugly florescent tubes...... even at ISO 1000 1/40 and 1/45 sec @ F4.5 it seems plenty bright...even at a full stop darker it was bright enough for AF without flash assist....Please understand, I'm not posting them so much for the quality of the pix as for the quality of the light...

IMAGE: http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/2705/smcl7418aj.jpg

IMAGE: http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/3163/tlr7461j.jpg

My Canon kit 450D/s90; Canon lenses 18-55 IS, 70-210/3.5-4.5....Nikon kit: D610; 28-105/3.5-4.5, 75-300/4.5-5.6 AF, 50/1.8D Nikkors, Tamron 80-210; MF Nikkors: 50/2K, 50/1.4 AI-S, 50/1.8 SeriesE, 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor (AF locked), 85mm/1.8K-AI, 105/2.5 AIS/P.C, 135/2.8K/Q.C, 180/2.8 ED, 200/4Q/AIS, 300/4.5H-AI, ++ Tamron 70-210/3.8-4, Vivitar/Kiron 28/2, ser.1 70-210/3.5, ser.1 28-90; Vivitar/Komine and Samyang 28/2.8; 35mm Nikon F/FM/FE2, Rebel 2K...HTC RE UWA camera

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Synenergy52
Senior Member
Avatar
798 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA (818)
     
Aug 14, 2009 10:34 |  #30
bannedPermanent ban

I used to have the DSC-F717. Was a superb camera in its day!

bohdank wrote in post #8451439 (external link)
Try taking some shots at ISO1600 with your 5D. If properly exposed the noise is far from objectionable and I HATE noise. It was the main impetus for me to go to a dSLR from a point and shoot (Sony 707).

I posted a few samples here

https://photography-on-the.net …hread.php?t=709​806&page=4


"Shooting the 5D is like shooting a view camera: its a pain, but the results are why you do it." - Ken Rockwell :p

My Photo Blog (external link)

5D| 17-40L | 50 1.4 | 430EX | SD780 IS P&S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

4,339 views & 0 likes for this thread, 21 members have posted to it and it is followed by 2 members.
I'm torn... low light dilemma
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.55forum software
version 2.55 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is marthabrand134
454 guests, 151 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.