A camera system for low light

[hamed_homayouni]

<p>Hi !<br>

I want to buy a camera system and my main criteria is tha ability of that system to take photos of static object in low light witout using tripod or flash . I dont care about the number of pixels or focusing speed or tracking ability of tha camera . and I dont want to spend more than 2500-3000 USD .<br>

I own several EF lenses ( 24-85/3.5-4.5 , 50/1.8 and Tamron 90/2.8 macro ) and speedlite 420EX so I like to stick with Canon if possible .<br>

I think I have two options :<br>

1/ To buy a Canon EOS 7D/550D and EFs 17-55/2.8 IS since I think It would be better for low light than 5D + 24-105/4 IS ( I know that 5D would have less noise in higher ISO settings but I dont think the diffrence would be more than 1 f stop ) or 5d + 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 (dosnt have IS )<br>

or<br>

2/ To buy a camera system with body based IS like Pentax K-7 or Sony a850 and use Sigma 30/1.4 or 50/1.4 with them .but the problem is that these cameras are not specially good when it comes to low noise in high ISO modes . <br>

What do you think I should do ?<br>

<br /> </p>

 

[jackie_baisa]

<p>Honestly, it's not so much the body as the glass. A great lens is a MUST. I needs to get down to at least f1.4 to be really sharp in really dim lighting without a tripod. You could PROBABLY do it if you dialed your 50/1.8 all the way down to 1.8 and kept it steady (and there was ENOUGH light). But if it's really dark, you WILL need a tripod unless you use a flash unit (which I'm guess you do not want to do?).<br>

For low-light noise, I think the Canon 5D Mark II is great. And it's in the mid-$2000 range. So that, with the 50mm/1.4 lens (which I love and use for this purpose) would be a great combination.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I concur with Jackie. The 5D II (with the 50/1.4, or even the 85/1.8) would be hard to beat for your application, Hamed. The camera delivers terrifically clean images at high ISO's.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>While fast glass seems like the obvious choice, unless the static object you are shooting is flat or almost flat, shallow DOF of a f1.4 (or faster) lens may not be suitable for your application. What type of objects are you photographing?</p>

<p>1 Stop of difference is huge when it comes to IQ in low light. A 5D or 5D Mark II is your best bet.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>I can pretty much shoot anything with just a 5d2 + 24-105 and 50 1.4. When I really want a nice small low light set up I use the 28 1.8, 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 prime set.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>5DII and 50 F1.4 (or an F1.2 lens) is the best option. From my perspective the 7D and old 5D have about the same high ISO performance. I own 7D, 5DII and 1dIIN (but not the old 5D) so my 7D old 5D comp is not based on a lot of first hand analysis. The 5DII is about 2 stops better than the 7D and the 1DIIN at least 1 stop better. Another option is a Nikon D700 with their 50 F1.4. from what I have seen the Nikon is slightly better than the Canon 5DII at high ISO (as it has 12MP vs 21MP)</p>

[buffdr_rasouliyan]

<p>Best option is what I shoot with, 5D mark II and 35 1.4 along with 50 1.4. For zoom I also use the 70-200 2.8 IS. I also have the 7D and no doubt the full frame wins in this department. Final answer is 5D Mark II along with 35 1.4. In terms of noise the 7D and the original 5D are about the same but the 7D meters better IMO. Good luck v/r Buffdr</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Buffdr, I, too, would have recommended the venerable 35/1.4, but at close to $4000, that combo would put Hamed way over budget.</p>

[lmwalker]

<p>5D (MK I) and 50/1.4.<br>

An example of very low light results:<br>

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/lmwalker/mtech_company_party_2010">http://www.pbase.com/lmwalker/mtech_company_party_2010</a></p>

 

[sarah_fox]

<p>For handheld photography of STATIC objects in low light? Hands-down, by a large margin, the most important thing you should have is an image stabilized lens. I'd far rather have an f/4 IS lens in your shooting situation than an f/1.2 non-stabilized lens, particularly if the IS is a more advanced version. If you know you're going to be pushing your limits, don't even consider a lens without IS, no matter how fast the optics -- unless you're using a non-stabilized, fast prime on an IS body, that is. (Caveat -- I don't know how many stops shooting advantage other manufacturers' IS bodies boast. Canon's in-lens stabilization might be more effective.)</p>

<p>Here's Yorktown's Coleman Bridge, taken with a 40D, 18-55IS, f/5.6, 1 second, handheld. It's tack sharp. Yes, I could have used a tripod, but I didn't have one with me. ;-) <br /><img src="http://www.graphic-fusion.com/phcolemanbridge01sm.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="467" /></p>

[pturton]

<p>The 50D + 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 & 135L @ ISO 2500 have worked well for me. Since you give no idea what your stationary subjects may be, but do give a dollar range, this may be your cheapest alternative for reasonably good IQ if you use good handheld technique. As already mentioned, glass is the 1st factor to consider.<br>

For a bunch more dollars, consider the 1D Mk iv plus f/2 or wider lenses at ISO 6400 - 12800 ;-)</p>

[hakhtar]

<p>500D + 24mm f1.4</p><div></div>