Best camera for low light

<p>I am interesting is purchasing a DSLR or mirrorless camera. I want to be able to take pictures of normal activities such as family events, vacations etc. However, I need a camera that will work in low light conditions. My daughter competes in Cheerleading competitions that take place in arenas that are dark The performance area is lit with lights similar to concert settings. There is a lot of action and fast movements that must also be captured in this low light setting. I have no idea what camera would work best for this situation.</p>

<p>Probably a Nikon D5. also in the race are A Canon 1D X Mk II and a Sony A7 S II which will provide better low light performance but has AF shortcomings compared to the other pair. - You might also look at A7 R II which will roughly keep up with the Nikon and Canon in low light performance has better AF than the A 7 SII and will blow the DSLRs out of the water with image quality in good light, if you don't need their frame rates and AF performance.<br>

Since you probably didn't intend to shoot the sports event itself maybe look at Canon 5D Mk IV and Nikon D750 too. <br>

And whatever you are looking at prepare to get a 70-200mm f2.8 lens for it. Sports photography is an expensive hobby.<br>

If you have EXIF files of pictures somebody else took of such cheerleading competitions maybe share ISO aperture and shutter speed here so people can jump in with their advice. I am not eager to lug the mentioned DSLRs with 70-200 lens + others around on vacations but YMMV.</p>

<p>Lexi ... greetings. It would be helpful to know what sort of budget you might have for this purchase. Under $500? Less than $1,000? Money no object?</p>

<p>Without a budget, it's difficult to suggest something. But, the best value would be something like this (prices are American):</p>

<p>Sony A7sII, $3,000 new<br /> A decent 70-200mm f/4 zoom, $1,500 new</p>

<p>You don't need a fast aperture given the A7sII's capability. The Nikon D5 has a higher ISO capability than the A7s but it is somewhat more expensive and much bigger and heavier. (Edit: one more thing - the Sony has an electronic shutter option, making it a completely silent camera).</p>

<p>Having said all that, the A6000 series, with APS-C (i.e. half-frame) sensors are very good in low light, too. I also like Micro 4/3 cameras, especially the latest models, but they might not quite be up there with the bigger sensors when it comes to ISO.</p>

<p>the best ? ... no budget <br>

Canon 1DX2 or 5D4, 70-200 2.8 IS USM II and maybe some large aperture "L"primes</p>

<p> </p>

<p>You don't need the <em>best</em> camera for low light. The Nikon D5 or Canon 1D X Mk II mentioned above will cost $6,000 U.S. and up before you even purchase a lens. Both these cameras are larger and heavier than you would want for family photos. The Sony A7s II is much smaller but is still costly at half the price of the other two, and its autofocus in dim light, while very accurate, is reported to be "frustratingly slow" (<a href="https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-semi-pro-interchangeable-lens-cameras/9">https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-semi-pro-interchangeable-lens-cameras/9</a>)</p>

<p>What you want is a camera with excellent, not necessarily the best, low light imaging and autofocus. I have Nikon lenses and often shoot in low light. For me, the Nikon D750 was a great choice at $2000. I don't know the Canon equivalent, but I'm sure that it's also excellent. These cameras have large sensors, which is ideal for low light, but they result in greater expense. As Karim said, you could do well with a camera with a smaller sensor, but I don't know how agile autofocus is on the A6000 series Sonys. In Nikon, a D7100 or D7200, with APS-C sensors, both focus well and quickly in low light, and they can produce good images in low light. Again, I'm sure there's an equivalent Canon that would also be a good choice.</p>

<p>I disagree with Karim that an f/4 lens is fine in low light if the camera has a good sensor. A lens with f/2.8 will allow the autofocus system to work better in low light and, at least on Nikon and Canon, will make it easier to use the viewfinder. Vibration reduction in the lens is very helpful if the camera body doesn't provide that.</p>

<p>After purchasing a suitable camera, you will find that shooting in dim light, even with vibration reduction, puts some additional demands on a photographer's technique, so that it would be good to practice prior to your shoot.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Lexi, Hector got it very right. Don't worry too much about the low light performance of a sensor; all current cameras with exchangeable lenses can deliver very good quality even at very high ISO values. The big difference is indeed AF systems, and having good lenses available for the system.<br>

Another consideration is how a camera feels in your hands, how comfortable you find it to hold and operate. Being able to hold a camera stable for when you cannot use a tripod really comes down to how a camera handles in <em>your</em> hands. This you can only find out for yourself.</p>

<p>So maybe it is better to go to a store that has a wide selection of cameras available, and check the models available that you can get on your budget. That way, you'll have a shortlist, and then it becomes much easier to compare like for like and see which one is best for your needs.</p>

<p>I've shot many, many events in dimly lit high school gyms and similar venues to what you are describing, both in the current digital world and going back 30 years go my newspaper days with film. The answer is not the camera but rather the lens. Almost any current Nikon or Canon DSLR will let you crank the ISO up to 1600 or 3200. But you still need a fast lens on top of that, not just for the exposure but because AF works better with a fast lens than a slow lens.<br /><br />I would recommend a 70-200 2.8. The 2.8 will let you open up enough to get high enough shutter speeds and, as mentioned, will let the AF work better than a 4.0 or slower lens. And the zoom range will give you more flexibility in how close you are to the action than a fix focal length lens.<br /><br />The bad news is that a Nikon/Canon 70-200 2.8 is about $2500. You can get a used one for half that, or get a Sigma or Tamron new for about the same price as the used Nikon/Canon.</p>

<p>As others have suggested expensive options, I shall suggest a lower price compromise. Pick up a secondhand Canon 6D full frame camera and a second hand Canon 70-200 f2.8 lens. If you look hard, the combo should be around $1500-1800. Crank your ISO up when needed and you can fix it all later in post.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>" . . . daughter competes in <strong><em>Cheerleading competitions that take place in arenas that are dark. </em></strong>The performance area is lit with <strong><em>lights similar to concert settings</em></strong>. There is a <strong><em>lot of action</em></strong> and <strong><em>fast movements</em></strong> that must also be captured in this low light setting."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Major Points that you should consider with a broad brush of the reason for their consideration; some of these points have already been mentioned:</p>

<p>> An idea of your Budget would be useful, it is understood you might not have an idea of what gear costs - but a ball park idea of what you are willing to spend, would reap benefit to advance a more focused conversation. </p>

<p>> Concerning the <strong>Camera's Low Light Capability: </strong>An ISO of around 3200 to 6400 and an Aperture of F/2.8 or faster, when used in most lighting that is "a concert setting" will allow a Shutter Speed acceptable to freeze most movements contained in Gymnastics and Dance - (Cheerleading comprises Gymnastics and Dance). Ergo you do not necessarily <strong><em>need</em></strong> the camera with best High ISO Performance - so I think that you require a camera which provides an acceptable ISO performance at around ISO6400. Today, that is most medium priced DSLR's and Mirrorless cameras. Obviously if the budget allows - "more capable" will always provide "a better advantage".</p>

<p>> Concerning the <strong>Uses of the Images: </strong>Note the phrase "a camera which provides <strong><em>an acceptable ISO performance</em></strong> at around ISO6400." The point is what is "acceptable" to you might not be acceptable to me or to Joe Black or Amy White. What is "acceptable" will mainly depend upon your intended USES of the images. If you want to use the images in web display, for example Facebook or similar, then those images would typically require a less technical excellence, than if you wanted to make 10 x 8 prints. </p>

<p>> Concerning the <strong>Maximum Aperture</strong> of the Lens (the smaller the F-Number the Larger the aperture) - note the two lenses already mentioned - 70 to 200 <strong>F/4</strong> and 70 to 200 <strong>F/2.8 . . .</strong> important to remember that ISO / Aperture / Shutter Speed are all related: if you take from one you must give to another. So for example at the Cheerleading Event - if you have an F/4 lens and another Mother has an F/2.8 Lens then you have to sacrifice a stop of Shutter Speed or a Stop of ISO to make the same shot. That might not sound a big deal, but is can be depending upon exactly how low is the Light Level. So the point is a "Faster Lens" (one with a lower "F-Number" will always be an advantage to you.</p>

<p>> Concerning the <strong>Focal Length</strong> of the Lens: <strong>ONE determining factor for the Focal Length required is the Distance that you will be from the Subject. </strong><br>

Two main leverages any Photographer can attain when shooting Sports/Dance Images are:<br>

a) To be able to choose the Vantage Point (Camera Position)<br>

and<br>

b) to be able to roam.<br>

Being able to roam might be difficult but not impossible; choosing your Camera Position might be easily doable. If you can ensure a good Camera Position, (for example by reserved seating or getting to the venue early) and also if you know the Choreography, then you can be more accurately choose an appropriate Focal Length.<br>

<strong>ANOTHER</strong> <strong>determining factor for the Focal Length required is the Camera Format that you use.</strong> If you choose an APS-C format camera, then you might not require a 70 to 200 lens if you can secure a reasonably close position to the action - in this case an 18 to 55 or 24 to 70 lens might be more appropriate. <br>

And in some situations a Zoom Lens might not be necessary at all. For example I have used an 85mm F/1.8 Prime Lens in low level, indoor light for: Swimming; Gymnastics; Stage Plays; Dance; Judo and Wrestling when I have had the ability to roam.<br>

<br>

Providing more information and addressing the implied questions would benefit more targeted responses.</p>

<p>WW</p>