Which Lense(s)? f/1.4

[david_mitchell14]

<p>Currently shoot with Fuji S5's. Have f/2.8 zooms and the 50mm f/1.8, but have struggled recently with high iso due to low light in venues.</p>

<p>Can either buy the 85mm f/1.4 or<br>

35mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4 & 85mm f/1.8</p>

<p>What would you buy and why?</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p><em><strong>"struggled recently with high iso due to low light in venues"</strong></em><br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p> Struggled with high iso <em><strong>using the f/2.8 zooms or the 50F/1.8?</strong></em><br>

<br>

<em><strong>*** </strong></em><br>

To answer the question as asked and limiting the answer to only those two choices: <br>

I would choose - 35mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4 & 85mm f/1.8<br>

<br>

Why? because it is a better spread of FLs.<br>

<br>

*** <br>

<br>

Answering beyond the limits of the question: I would keep the 50/1.8 and get a fast 24 and a fast 85 - a fast 24 is more useful than a fast 35, on a DX camera, IMO.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

 

[Aoresteen]

<p>The S5 has a crop factor of 1.5. The 50mm becomes a 75mm f/1.4. This is the lens I would buy. The 85 would become a 127.5mm lens which is on the long side.</p>

[laronge photographie coutu]

<p>If you have f2.8 zooms why not upgrade your body? A D90 or D300 will have much better high iso performance than your S5.</p>

[john_deerfield]

<p>I agree with Josh, upgrade the body! You have the 50mm f/1.8, do you like it? Are you able to use it at the ISO you want? If not then you definitely need to upgrade the body, another f/1.8 or f/1.4 lens isn't going to give you any better ISO performance over the 50mm. If you are happy with the 50mm but want a different focal range, what range do you find yourself needing? I personally love shooting the 85mm at a reception to isolate the couple I am shooting. I have the Sigma 30mm and 50mm and often don't bring the 30mm out. If I need wide, I need something wider than 30mm (cropped sensor). But as a more direct response to the original question, I would buy the 85mm f/1.4. Why? I already have a 30mm f/1.4, a 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8 and I would love to upgrade the 85mm f/1.8!</p>

[William Michael]

<p>. . . yes, that's why my first response was a question . . . is David struggling with low light at F/1.8, or not. . . also it might be useful to know what you (David) consider as "high ISO".<br>

. . . also I understand the question means David is considering buying either one lens (85/1.4) or a set of THREE lenses (35, 50, 85)<br>

WW</p>

[david_mitchell14]

<p>Thank you all for responding. William you are correct it was a choice between one and three lenses!<br>

The last wedding I did seemed to be quite bright but even at 2.8 I was finding I needed an iso of 400 and up. <br>

The S5's noise levels seem really noticeable from about 320 iso so I thought the extra light afforded at 1.4 may help.<br>

Anyway, the decision was taken out of my hands as the bride at my next wedding wants a group shot of 150 people so I've opted to buy the 50mm f/1.4 and the newer 10-20mm Sigma.<br>

I have looked at the D300s and this is my upgrade route (although the D700 high iso capability is making this a difficult choice!) Ultimatley I can't really afford to go full frame so the D300s (x2) looks like the replacement for my 2 S5's!</p>

[rt_jones]

<p><strong><em>The last wedding I did seemed to be quite bright but even at 2.8 I was finding I needed an iso of 400 and up.</em></strong></p>

<p>We all should have this problem.</p>

[peter_cohen]

<p>Since this discussion seems to be centered on the high ISO issue, I'll add that I was experimenting with Lightroom 3 in tethered mode and the new Camera Raw 6.1 plug-in that's supposed to have better noise reduction.</p>

<p>On my D90, 18-200 at 24mm, 3200 ISO, in my office with only an overhead light at night, I was able to remove virtually all of the grain at 3200 and still have another 20% of the slider to go. YMMV, but the new Camera Raw is great. I'm not saying it's better than a D700's 6400 ISO, but it sure makes the 3200 ceiling on the D90 a lot more tolerable, for lack of a better word.</p>

<p>Sort of like push processing back in the day without the resultant grain increase.</p>

[parv]

Peter C, what happens to details (with use of Camera Raw 6.1 plug in) with as much as noise reduction that you write of?

[savagesax]

I agree with the others. Buy a new camera. In the old film days, even with the fantastic hassalblad gear, 2.8 was wonderful, but it was only offered on a few lenses. The 500mm hassy lens went from 5.6 to F64 hense the name the "64 Club".

 

My main lens at weddings is the 24-105 L and the F stop is 3.5 to F4.5. The point I'm making is having the fastest gear isn't aways the answer, but it sure helps.

 

I hardly ever shoot over IS0/ASA 400, because the IS and VR lenses allow you to hand hold at very low shutter speeds. ASA 800 is the highest I'm ever shot at.

 

When shooting formals outside I'm often at ASA 50. To me the colors are so vibrant, compared to ASA 1600. The difference is astonishing. It's sort of like shooting the Fuji F50 film and most people actually rated this film at F32 or even F25

 

The higher your ASA goes ,the more pixels and grain you will get. Make a print at 40X60 and you will surely see the differences.

[peter_cohen]

<p>Parv: Between the improved Sharpening in ACR 6.1 and the noise reduction, I think the details hold up very well. That said, I haven't had time to do anything more than futz around with the high ISO and ACR 6.1. Usually there's some sort of trade-off that one is willing to make to get the shot without resorting to flash.</p>

[ryan_k]

<p>Get a full frame DSLR and crank that ISO for ambient. Even a 50 1.8 can expose backgrounds at 800 or 1200 ISO with negligible noise. Yes noise will be there, but it won't be image-destroying. <br>

I can use my 5d with a bounce flash at 800 to 1600 ISO and get great results for what I'm looking for using a 50 1.8. I just ordered the 50 1.4, but only for the ability to focus with that extra stop of viewfinder light. </p>

<p>I can certainly tell you though, I would never crank the ISO on my crop sensor camera.... there's just too much noise.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Ryan--f1.4 is 2/3 stop wider than f1.8. Also, if you don't underexpose your images, noise is not a problem, even with cropped sensor cameras. I shoot my 40D alongside my 5D, and have no problem going to ISO 1600 on both, 3200 shot with care. And, noise appears worse on a monitor--when printed, it appears much less noticeable.</p>

<p>In any event, I appreciate wide aperture primes just the same as anyone else. However, there will be times even f1.8 or f1.2, is not just not enough. Maybe a good tripod and head may be a better purchase?</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>I can certainly tell you though, I would never crank the ISO on my crop sensor camera.... there's just too much noise. </p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

An old and tired EOS20D . . .<br>

</p>

<p >a) Pushed to ISO 3200, san Flash, Soft Broad Indoor Light, no problem at 10 x 8 print: <br>

<a href="../photo/11164532&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/11164532&size=lg</a><br>

</p>

<p >b) Pushed to ISO1600 showing Shadow Detail in Blacks – available light through a window - all are OK at 10X8:<br>

<a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=945950">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=945950</a><br>

</p>

<p >c) Pushed to ISO3200 sans Flash and Tungsten Lighting, but <strong><em>they are in the shadow area</em></strong> – a little detail in the Black end is missing, but it is acceptable at 14inches wide print:<br>

<a href="../photo/10738830&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/10738830&size=lg</a><br>

</p>

<p >d) Pushed to ISO1600, no problem at 14 x 11 print:<br>

<a href="../photo/9193571&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/9193571&size=lg</a><br>

</p>

<p >e) At ISO1600 Moderate Cloud Cover – no issue at 10 x 8 prints:<br>

<a href="../photo/11164541&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/11164541&size=lg</a><br>

<br>

The key is you HAVE to nail the exposure.<br>

<br>

WW</p>