I am looking for one or more lenses to shoot in low light. I have two situations that I need to cover. One will be at a convention where I may be further away, and unable to use a flash. The second will be at a wedding. I have narrowed my choices down to the following lenses:
35mm f/2D AF Nikkor
50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor
85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
35 - 70 mm f/2.8D AF Zoom Nikkor
80 - 200 mm f/2.8D AF Zoom Nikkor
I threw the 80-200 in there only because I am considering that as a single choice lens. I really don't want to lug a lens that big around for four days, but if that is my best option, I may just use it in very low light, and use my 28-200 f4-5.6 otherwise and hope for the best.
I don't really have any experience with wider aperture lenses, and I would greatly appreciate any comments as to which lens or lenses would be best for the two events that I will be shooting at.
You'll find that the f/2.8 lenses become too slow when there really is no light, but the 80-200 is terrific when 2.8 is sufficient... the 70-200 is better because of the VR allowing you to shoot with less light, but if your subjects are moving, it doesnt help that much...
The 85 1.4 is the class of the bunch in my opinion, but the 50 1.8 is a lens that everyone should have (for $99, why not?)
I don't think, though that any of these will be sufficient for a wedding in an of themselves, though, and I would definitely look at a 50 1.8, 85 1.8 combo or if you can swing it, the 35, 50 and 85...
You might consider the 28-70 2.8 too, if you think its fast enough, but its expensive... tamron and a few others make similar ranged lenses that are affordable and of decent quality...
the question really is - how much light will you have! That will then determine a lens choice.
If you are talking about a dark church for the wedding - use a flash! But for the convention - quite often an f/2.8 lens will be sufficient, as most convention floors are designed with sufficient light - or is this some other kind of convention?
In any which case - the 80-200 is stellar - especially the AFs version. The 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm are both stellar lenses.
If I were you, and I have been down this road before - I would personally purchase a 50mm and an 80-200mm lens.
I am looking for one or more lenses to shoot in low light. I have two situations that I need to cover. One will be at a convention where I may be further away, and unable to use a flash. The second will be at a wedding. I have narrowed my choices down to the following lenses:
35mm f/2D AF Nikkor
50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor
85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
35 - 70 mm f/2.8D AF Zoom Nikkor
80 - 200 mm f/2.8D AF Zoom Nikkor
I threw the 80-200 in there only because I am considering that as a single choice lens. I really don't want to lug a lens that big around for four days, but if that is my best option, I may just use it in very low light, and use my 28-200 f4-5.6 otherwise and hope for the best.
I don't really have any experience with wider aperture lenses, and I would greatly appreciate any comments as to which lens or lenses would be best for the two events that I will be shooting at.
I am using the 50mm 1.8 and I am quite happy with that lens (based on reviews it seems even sharper than the 1.4 version). I am going to buy a 35mm f2 very soon to shoot a bit wider. If you can afford a third one, I would go for the 85 1.8.
Otherwise, if there is SOME light or you are prepared to use higher ISOnumbers (800 and above), the 35-70 f2.8 is doing wonders (for the price - incredibly sharp wide open) and is becoming my favourite lens for portrait and interior shots...
I would like to thank everyone for their input. I have decided to go with the 50mm and the 85mm for now. I have a friend that is going to let me borrow his 80-200 until I can get one myself.
I think that should cover me. I am not sure what the lighting situation will be at the wedding, but I just want to be prepared for as much as possible. Hopefully I will be able to use my lights for the candid shots, but I won't know until I get to there.
Thanks again, I will be sure and let you know how everything turned out.
gugs wrote:
35-70 f2.8 is doing wonders (for the price - incredibly sharp wide open) and is becoming my favourite lens for portrait and interior shots...
really - I have to try mine out indoors.... what settings do you use your 35-70 with for indoors --- handheld or on tripod?
lxdesign wrote:
really - I have to try mine out indoors.... what settings do you use your 35-70 with for indoors --- handheld or on tripod?
I use the lens for family gatherings, when friends come home, usually end of the afternoon or in the evening, so not too good light conditions. I prefer (that's of course a matter of taste) the colors and shadows I get without flash if possible. That means that I often have to increase sensitivity from ISO 400 to ISO 640 even 800 to be able to shoot in "normal interior" light, and of course at relatively low speed. I happen to be quite steady allowing to shoot at speeds like 1/20 sec at 35mm or 1/30 at 70mm without "vibration blur".
This gives me pics I could not shoot with my kit lens (without a flash) but with the flexibility of a zoom. Maybe not the ideal technique according to the book but I have had some interesting results. The limitations however, have motivated me to buy a 35 f2 as well to gain a stop...
jshots wrote:
I would like to thank everyone for their input. I have decided to go with the 50mm and the 85mm for now. I have a friend that is going to let me borrow his 80-200 until I can get one myself.
I think that should cover me. I am not sure what the lighting situation will be at the wedding, but I just want to be prepared for as much as possible. Hopefully I will be able to use my lights for the candid shots, but I won't know until I get to there.
Thanks again, I will be sure and let you know how everything turned out.
The 85mm 1.8 is a killer lense. Pick one up secondhand. I use it for Volleyball and basketball, it is better than the 1.4 85mm for a few reasons. The DOF at 1.4 make it very limited in it's usefullness, also it is not as sharp as the 1.8, and the price is stupid for half a stop.
Gav
