Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Camera body or lens for low light ?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    新加坡
    Posts
    153

    Default Camera body or lens for low light ?

    So ... After taking pictures for a while, you found that your equipments are lacking for taking moving objects in low light conditions ...

    Would you ...
    a)Upgrade your camera body to shoot at a higher ISO
    (assuming that better body indeed = better noise control)

    b)Get better lenses (like those f2.8s around)

    c)Stick with your flash unit and do nothing

    hmmm so which would you choose ? Or are there any other suggestions ?
    Last edited by jayque; 17th November 2009 at 12:21 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Upgrade lens more worth it imo.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    306

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    depends on alot of factors. do you have the spare cash? are you earning from shooting? can it fund your new gadgets? do you really need them?

    andriod is right in the sense that camera bodies depreciate way faster than a good L lens. so maybe a investment in a lens with lower fstop will sound cheaper.

    then again, a rifle without a scope will not kill enemies. for me, i'd go for a good lens first, then slowly save up for a better camera.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Eastern Side, Tampines
    Posts
    377

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Hi,

    I think you need a good powerful flash that recycle fast and a fast constant speed zoom lens (f/2.8 or below). Unfortunately both doesnt come cheap.

    Cheers.

    Mahathir
    Only in death, I shall be truly liberated.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Depends on your camera too. If your camera body has good AF sensors and the lens is limiting, then upgrade lens. Or vice versa. Or upgrade both.
    Alpha

  6. #6

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Get a prime lens. They are cheaper than their zoom equivalents. Eg. 50mm f1.8

    If you want to take moving objects in low light condition, can get a flash to "freeze" the motion or a body with better AF tracking

  7. #7
    Deregistered shaoken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Clementi/West Coast
    Posts
    2,119

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Actually if you ask me, I think that the body (ISO control) is important in low light as well as the lens.

  8. #8
    Senior Member madmartian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Outer Space
    Posts
    20,241

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    You have to consider if taking moving objects in low light conditions is a one off thingy or once in awhile kind, i guess its better to stay with your current setup. But if you are into low light photography and that's your cup of tea, then invest in a super fast lens. Or as Rashkae said, upgrade both. If your setup is the 1st generation system or if money is of no concern to you, go get the latest in the market.
    Take the shot!

  9. #9

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Use the flash. Hardly anyone knows how to use the flash properly nowadays. =)
    D3s / D3x / 18-55 f3.5 - 5.6 / 55-200 f3.5-5.6 / 50 f1.8

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    611

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    I too vote for the flash. Bumping the iso to me is cheating. Sacrificing quality defeats the purpose of taking nice photos. But if you want the ambient feel, then lens is the way to go.
    S5pro,Toki28-70,12-24,Tam17-35spoilt,70-200,SB600,800,Voigt 58F1.4,http://hensongerard.multiply.com

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Off the map
    Posts
    235

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    1)Flash.
    2)Lens.
    3)Body.

    I'm sticking to this plan. I have a flash, now im looking at upgrading my lens. Body change? I'm happy with my current body, 500D.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    611

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Quote Originally Posted by FriedKimchi View Post
    1)Flash.
    2)Lens.
    3)Body.

    I'm sticking to this plan. I have a flash, now im looking at upgrading my lens. Body change? I'm happy with my current body, 500D.
    Exactly what i would do too...
    S5pro,Toki28-70,12-24,Tam17-35spoilt,70-200,SB600,800,Voigt 58F1.4,http://hensongerard.multiply.com

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    big tree town
    Posts
    2,389

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Get all 3. Just bite the bullet and solve ur desire to upgrade (for the time being).
    cameras are not made of tofu

  14. #14
    Member dennisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Freezing Upp Thomson/Mandai!
    Posts
    1,919

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    Lens and body both are impt. But if given a choice I'd say body. Reason is I still could handle lowlight with f4 UWA lens on slower shutter and high iso, moreso with flashguns.

    Lens are great if you're not using flash at that time.. I use f1.2 and 1.4 mostly (I'm a low light addict too)

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    新加坡
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    If I ever do get the moolahs.. i'll go for the lenses first too =)

  16. #16

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    It depends on what you're shooting...
    For portraits, definitely lens+flash, unless you already have a really good lens. Remember, a bigger aperture lens (at bigger aperture) gives you less depth of field and as a result, less room for focus errors.

    For low light general shots that you need more DOF, go for a better body with clean ISO. (I used to recommend only lenses, but ever since I've seen the ISO quality at 3200,6400 from newer cams, I'll have to start recommending them )

    Flash is always a good to have, not always necessary, and very dependent on the style/feel/weight you wanna carry/convenience you need/budget

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Singapore, West
    Posts
    362

    Default Re: Camera body or lens for low light ?

    I would say lenses too, but as the rest catches up with the Nikon D3S. Changing body is becoming viable.

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
  •