Low light mid range canon

J

jhelliar

Suspended / Banned
Messages
53
Edit My Images
No
I wonder if anyone can help.

I currently have a canon 50d and want to upgrade. I do a lot of low light pictures so am looking for something with a good ISO.

Any suggestions?

Many thanks,

Jack
 
Last edited:
Are you ashamed of owning a Canon, or is there some other reason your post is Not Safe For Work? ;)
 
Members who post on either am iPad or use a certain Apple app (not sure which one to be honest) seem to have this issue. What are you using?

It may be an idea for you to use the full browser on your product when making posts. Just to avoid the NSFW error it produces.
 
The next step up in iso performance would be full frame. The 60d isn't an upgrade from the 50d unless u want video and the 7d is only slightly better than the 50d at iso handling.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
The next step up in iso performance would be full frame. The 60d isn't an upgrade from the 50d unless u want video and the 7d is only slightly better than the 50d at iso handling.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jim. What would be the next step up from the 7D?

Sorry about the iPad issue just downloaded it.
 
Don't worry Bout the iPad issue, it just seems to be some weird error with this board and other forums. Although I am very happy with the ISO on my 7d them it has to be said full frame is the way to go for better ISO handling.
 
What's your budget?

A 5DMkI 'classic' would be a noticeable upgrade for ISO performance, a 5DMkII would be a very noticeable upgrade for ISO performance, and it wouldn't be a downgrade in other areas like the 5D 'classic' (smaller screen etc.)
 
What lenses do you have?

I though the 50D was pretty good at High ISO. Maybe better glass would help out rather than an expensive body change??
 
Unless you have a lot of lenses maybe you should try another makers products if you specifically want high ISO capability with a crop sensor

Canon owner myself and happy enough with my lot, but can't see that much of an improvement in the 60D or 7D to justify an upgrade, just a lot more mp.

The new Sony 16mp sensor seems to have the edge for what you want and could be worth a look
 
If you have EF lenses then 5D mkII - if they are EF-S then they would need changing as well and it could get very very expensive (rather than just very expensive)
 
odd jim said:
The next step up in iso performance would be full frame. The 60d isn't an upgrade from the 50d unless u want video and the 7d is only slightly better than the 50d at iso handling.
Click to expand...

From what I've read people seem to think that the 60D is an upgrade from both the 50D and 7D at least in terms of IQ and higher ISO performance as it doesn't seem to suffer the banding issues that reportedly affect the 7D.
 
woof woof said:
From what I've read people seem to think that the 60D is an upgrade from both the 50D and 7D at least in terms of IQ and higher ISO performance as it doesn't seem to suffer the banding issues that reportedly affect the 7D.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the high ISO is supposed to be ever so slightly better, but not enough IMO to warrant an upgrade. As it is, the 50D has very good high ISO handling anyway, so for the OP to have a worthwhile upgrade for that alone, a second hand 5d would be the way to go as that would be at least noticable! Only problem - its FF so any ef-s lenses the OP has wouldnt be useable on it. The OP might find the 60d disappointing on a whole though, due to the lower build and lack of controls and features left out from the 50d.

To the OP - as TCR4X4 asked, what lenses do you have? A fast prime or 2.8 zoom might solve the issue? I use a 50d for indoor sports with fast lenses and I find the combo excellent for low light stuff!
 
Last edited:
My main lenses are sigma 170-500mm 1:5-6.3 APO DG and sigma 28-300mm Aspherical IF.

Do you think better lenses would be the way to go and if so what do would you suggest to replace those?

Thanks for everyones help

Jack
 
Most certainly, you need fast glass for low light work, neither of those are.

What do you shoot mainly? My first 2 suggestions would be a Canon 17-55 f/2.8 and a Canon 70-200 f/4 IS, or maybe the f/2.8 if you have the budget, but depends on what you shoot really.
 
So longer the better I guess.
In that case I's stick with the 70-200, either f/4, or f/2.8.

I dont think a new body will give you anything much, If you go FF, then you loose a bit of reach with the lenses you have, but at the moment the lenses you have arent ideal for low light stuff, however low light lenses cost £. All comes down to money really.
 
budget,
really cant suggest lenses or bidies forthat matter without know ing if you have an upper limit?

I have a 50D and its good in low light and i often use it in the high ends of the ISO range.
 
Suprised noone has suggested Nikon yet :)
 
TCR4x4 said:
So longer the better I guess.
In that case I's stick with the 70-200, either f/4, or f/2.8.

I dont think a new body will give you anything much, If you go FF, then you loose a bit of reach with the lenses you have, but at the moment the lenses you have arent ideal for low light stuff, however low light lenses cost £. All comes down to money really.
Click to expand...

As above, but I'd go for the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex hsm II excellent low lights sports lens at half the price of the Canon 2.8. New lenses are certainly the way forward over the body as we have already said, the 50d is excellent in low light.
 
odd jim said:
As above, but I'd go for the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex hsm II excellent low lights sports lens at half the price of the Canon 2.8. New lenses are certainly the way forward over the body as we have already said, the 50d is excellent in low light.
Click to expand...

Good call.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top