Shooting in low light

F

FunkyMunky

Suspended / Banned
Messages
12
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys. I have an issue with my current kit lens (18-55), in that its a very slow lens and does not have IS functionality which means I cant shoot in any low light situation without a tripod. I am looking to buy a new lens and having been looking at either a fast lens (Tamron 17-50 f/2.8) or an IS lens (Canon 17-85 IS USM). Will either of these two lenses help me in the fight against camera shake in all my 'low-light'/low ISO photos? If so, which one would be the better option?

Cheers.
 
FunkyMunky said:
Hi guys. I have an issue with my current kit lens (18-55), in that its a very slow lens and does not have IS functionality which means I cant shoot in any low light situation without a tripod. I am looking to buy a new lens and having been looking at either a fast lens (Tamron 17-50 f/2.8) or an IS lens (Canon 17-85 IS USM). Will either of these two lenses help me in the fight against camera shake in all my 'low-light'/low ISO photos? If so, which one would be the better option?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Hi!

The EFS 17-85mm is useless handheld in lowlight IMO, even with IS (which isn't the best example of IS anyway), it's still a slow lens.

I think for the best chances of taking handheld shots in low light you do indeed need faster glass, whether it's f\1.4, 1.8 or 2.8.
Faster prime lenses like a nifty fifty or 85mm can help you if the focal range is suitable for your needs.
IS may help but also and quite importantly, practise how you hold the camera for the best results.

Check out Joe's tip:

[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EDsx3-FWfwk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EDsx3-FWfwk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

Using this tip combined with alot of practise, I managed to shoot at shutter speeds I never thought possible. After alot of practise I got a crisp shot at 1\8th! I kid you not!
It's not easy, especially if you can't get used to using your left eye and it also works better for me with shorter lenses. Never the less it really works!
 
I'd ask what are you photographing. If you can use the 50mm f1.8 then that would be your cheapest option. Ive never used the Tamron lens so I can't comment on its quality. Personally if the 50mm focal length was OK for the subject I was photographing I'd go with that and save my money. Or splash out on the 1.4 version. ( I think I'd stick with the 1.8 though).
 
Tomas Whitehouse said:
Hi!

The EFS 17-85mm is useless handheld in lowlight IMO, even with IS (which isn't the best example of IS anyway), it's still a slow lens.

I think for the best chances of taking handheld shots in low light you do indeed need faster glass, whether it's f\1.4, 1.8 or 2.8.
Faster prime lenses like a nifty fifty or 85mm can help you if the focal range is suitable for your needs.
IS may help but also and quite importantly, practise how you hold the camera for the best results.

Check out Joe's tip:

[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EDsx3-FWfwk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EDsx3-FWfwk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

Using this tip combined with alot of practise, I managed to shoot at shutter speeds I never thought possible. After alot of practise I got a crisp shot at 1\8th! I kid you not!
It's not easy, especially if you can't get used to using your left eye and it also works better for me with shorter lenses. Never the less it really works!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the video mate. Very useful info there.

Ill practice those techniques with my current kit lens and see how I go with that. That should help me make a decision from there.

Chappers said:
I'd ask what are you photographing. If you can use the 50mm f1.8 then that would be your cheapest option. Ive never used the Tamron lens so I can't comment on its quality. Personally if the 50mm focal length was OK for the subject I was photographing I'd go with that and save my money. Or splash out on the 1.4 version. ( I think I'd stick with the 1.8 though).
Click to expand...

I already have the 50mm f/1.8. I imagine you would only use that for potrait shots and close ups. I have tried using it for potraits, but not overly handy. Maybe I just dont know how to use it. Oh and I will be mostly using the camera for automotive and landscape shots.
 
The 50mm on a cropped sensor camera should be reasonable for portraits . It gives the same angle of view as an 80mm of a FF, which a lot of people think is the ideal for a portrait lens. I do prefer something longer such as a 105mm, but then it's horses for courses.

You don't say why your not happy with the results from the 50mm. I think you need to do a little more thinking as to what you are trying to achieve. If you already have a 50mm prime then maybe you should look at maybe a wide angle prime as well. Use your existing kit lens to evaluate what focal length you are generally using and from that you can see what lenses you should be considering
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top