Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Which is better, higher ISO or faster lenses?

  1. #1

    Default Which is better, higher ISO or faster lenses?

    Since most people is worried about the noise level in higher ISO, so, which do you think is of better quality:

    1. f4.0 lens (slower) with ISO 1600 (17-85 IS)
    2. f2.8 lens (faster) with ISO 800 (14-54)

    * both should have equiv. EV, I suppose.

  2. #2

    Default

    Higher ISO => more noise

    Faster lenses => more cost

    so to decide which one is better is up to you
    Last edited by megaweb; 21st February 2005 at 01:54 PM.
    See my Photo Gallery at the Clubsnap

  3. #3
    Moderator nightwolf75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    really MORE diaper changes
    Posts
    17,862
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    no fight. always faster lenses.
    If Life worked on auto mode then manual mode for photography would have never existed. ― Deeksha Mittal

  4. #4
    Jason H0
    Guests

    Default

    i recommend to you to use a higher ISO and then get Ninja or neat image to clean up the noisy in the photo. Better then to get a lens with a big whole cos it will cost a even bigger whole in your wallet.


    Quote Originally Posted by ykkok
    Since most people is worried about the noise level in higher ISO, so, which do you think is of better quality:

    1. f4.0 lens (slower) with ISO 1600 (17-85 IS)
    2. f2.8 lens (faster) with ISO 800 (14-54)

    * both should have equiv. EV, I suppose.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Woodlands
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Having a faster lense means that you have luxury of going in different light situation without sarcificing the quality of the picture. If one is talking about of depth of field, a F2.8 will giving u a better out of focus background(shallower) than a F4. There will be times u need faster shutter speed and boosting ISO will give u grainy pictures, to capture motion for eg., that where a faster len come in.

    Of course, having a faster lense also means that you pay more and carry more weight.

    Juz a humble comparision...

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    3,287

    Default

    Faster lens anytime.

  7. #7

    Default

    u must look at the focal length range also

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by user111
    u must look at the focal length range also
    For instance :

    1. 300mm F4
    2. 300mm F2.8

    I find that some Olympus lenses gives you one stop more light comparatively to others.
    Last edited by ykkok; 22nd February 2005 at 08:29 AM.

  9. #9

    Default

    for 300mm its still ok to get f4.

    eg for 50mm 1.8 is enuff already vs 1.4

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    Noise free high ISO is a back-saver! Can use slower, lighter lenses. Believe me, it matters!

  11. #11

    Default

    Agree, it'll be great to have both.

    I also notice that 4/3 lenses are generally smaller due to a smaller sensor behind, with equivalent f-stop and effective focal length.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ykkok
    For instance :

    1. 300mm F4
    2. 300mm F2.8

    I find that some Olympus lenses gives you one stop more light comparatively to others.


    Do note that the DOF is deeper on the Olympus system due to the smaller sensor. So a f/2.8 on the oly is comparatively the same as a f/5.6 on full-frame sensor, w.r.t DOF.


    .

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    In my own world
    Posts
    1,314

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ykkok
    Since most people is worried about the noise level in higher ISO, so, which do you think is of better quality:

    1. f4.0 lens (slower) with ISO 1600 (17-85 IS)
    2. f2.8 lens (faster) with ISO 800 (14-54)

    * both should have equiv. EV, I suppose.
    faster lens u still can use higher ISO...what do u think?

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AReality


    Do note that the DOF is deeper on the Olympus system due to the smaller sensor. So a f/2.8 on the oly is comparatively the same as a f/5.6 on full-frame sensor, w.r.t DOF.


    .
    I agree that DOF is deeper on the Olympus system, but deeper DOF is sometime useful. For example shooting macro shots, I no longer need to struggle up to f22 to get sufficient DOF, usually f11-f16 will do. This give me plenty more light to work with.

    But, I don't agree on how you phrase it - I think, it is misleading as people may think that the Olympus system is darker when u say f2.8 = f5.6. Rather, is actually because of the shorter focal length to achieve the same field of view (fov).

    I would rather say, for the same fov, 300mm film = 150mm 4/3. That's the reason why, the latter has deeper DOF.
    Last edited by ykkok; 23rd February 2005 at 08:16 AM.

  15. #15

    Default

    When you are under low light situation, I believe there isn't much UV ray that you want to filter, removing the UV filter will increase the light into the camera sensor. I have done the experiment before, by fixing the appeture, and let the camera auto set the speed, I found that by removing the UV filter, the speed increase and when put back the filter, it reduced.

    If money no problem it is also good to have faster Lens, because you still can set to F4.0 with a F2.8 lens, but reversed is not true.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •