Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy I can certainly see how those two photos would appear underexposed, but they actually do a good job of reflecting the actual lighting of the scene.
I understand. But I don't think that reflecting the actual lighting should be a priority. And you can apply a curve to brighten the shot without blowing the highlights, if you are indeed close to clipping them on the face. Anyway, that is just my approach and suggestion.
Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy That's very true, and I'll have to admit that I don't get a lot of action shots shooting indoors at night without a flash.
I can't claim I take "action" shots, but I can deal better with the fact that my daughter doesn't sit still one second.
Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Now I don't have any experience shooting faster than f/2.8, but I would think that shooting a moving kid would also be a challenge when working with a razor thin DOF. So while you get the advantage of a faster shutter speed, you have to deal with a thinner focal plane. Can you comment on that?
It is not easy even if she is staying in one place and just moving her head, but I found I get better results working with thin DOF than with slow shutter speed. I manually focus and I described my approach
here.
I just uploaded a shot I took wide open at f/1.2:
Pentax K-7, Cosina 55/1.2, f/1.2 ISO 800 1/40
Note that even though I was shooting at f/1.2 the shutter speed was still pretty slow. I didn't notice it at the moment, or I would have bumped the ISO further.
You could check
my brother's flickr stream for other samples - he has shared lots more children shots than me.
Here's one with an 85mm at f/2 on a D700, so DOF is even thinner - he usually uses a flash and smaller apertures, but this one is taken with available light.