Low light focussing: R2K Vs. Elan II

[eos 10 fan]

I bought my SO an EOS 300 (Rebel 2000) a few months ago. Most of the

shots are of an 2 1/2 year old doing what active 2 1/2 year old boys

do. We are finding that in low light that we are missing shots or the

camera will not fire in [P] mode - even when the annoying white focus

assist light flashes. She likes using a zoom lens. These pictures are

not meant to be great art, but to capture fun & fleating moments.

 

A review of past posts and a comparo of specs between the R2K & II

seems to indicate that the II would be the way to go, but I have yet

to see any specific comments about the performance of the II in low

light as compared to the R2K - can anyone help me here? I guess I'm

ideally looking for folks who started with an R2K and then moved up

to the II or those with a II who bought an R2K as a backup. Thanks.

 

--

[PuppyDigs]

The Elan II has a near infrared AF assist light that projects a pattern of horizontal and vertical lines the AF sensors can lock on to in total darkness on any surface--even a blank white wall. So, yes the Elan II has excellent low light AF just as long as you're within range of the assist beam (about 20 feet).

 

You could upgrade your camera with a 420EX Speedlite and get the same low light performance as the Elan II and a better flash to boot. Why? The 420 has a near infrared AF assist light that projects a pattern of horizontal and vertical lines the AF sensors can lock on. Moreover, it is custom designed to work with the 7 sensor array of the EOS 300 and Elan 7E/30.

[brian_torio]

Dan - I am not certain, but I believe that low-light focusing is based, at least in part, on the maximum apeture of the lens. I have a Rebel 2000 as a back-up and have noticed that it has quite a bit of difficulty focusing in low light when used with the kit zoom lens it came with (I think it's the 35 - 80 F4-5.6 or something along those lines ... it came with the body). The problem goes away (or is at least minimized) using a lens like the 70-200 F2.8 or the 50 F1.4.

 

All that said, a faster lens (even if it's the $80 or so 50mm F1.8) might be the solution to the problem. I know it's not a zoom, but it will also be much sharper than most consumer level zoom lenses and it should help out quite a bit in low-light situations.

 

I hope that helps.

[patty_mac]

You really need to ditch the slow cheap zoom lens that came with the camera - that will give you a much larger improvement than simply upgrading the camera. Low light focusing really doesn't significantly improve in the EOS line until you hit the EOS 3 in my opinion. Try a 50mm f/1.8 (@ $65) - its a much cheaper alternative and you just might find you can live without the zoom. Also try manually selecting the central focus point in low light.

[tom_menegatos]

While a larger aperture lens would help the auto focus assist light on the Elan II camera body is the big difference as Puppy Face mentioned.

[tawen_mei]

I agree with Tom.

 

I have both R2K and Elan II. R2K with 50/1.4 is nothing compared to Elan II with 28-135 at 50. The infrared AF assist light helps the most. It projects a pattern which the AF sensor focuses on, where as R2K merely has a flash light.

 

If I were you I would get the 420EX or something like that, since Elan II is not that different/better from R2K. I guess R2K would be better than Elan II when you use Canon's E-TTL flash (a lot more light sensors and AF points on R2K). For me I needed a cheap backup, needed to focus at low light for a friend's wedding, and am stuck with Vivitar 283 flash used by my other camera...