Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-27-2010, 05:27 AM   #16
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by tokyoso Quote
i think the paparazzi's use a 2.8 zoom. or something... here's a video i found:
Photo Grind! Inside a Paparazzi’s camera bag
This is absolutely f***ing fascinating. As-it-happens sports-x-photojournalism requires big fast expensive gear. We're not even in the same solar system here on Planet Pentax. At least we don't need pepper spray (or do we?) to survive. When do the paparazzis need bodyguards to counter the celebs' bodyguards? Photogs "with everything taped down", who "don't know what they're doing", crowding in like a flock of wasps. Makes me want to stay on a private island, guarded by orcas.

And in his spare time, he shoots flowers. His name is Flores. Woooo.....

02-27-2010, 05:59 AM   #17
Veteran Member
fractal's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,549
QuoteOriginally posted by auto210035 Quote
That's taking away half the fun of it. Besides, city folks are rather cranky
City folk will be more tolerable than people from outside the city.

QuoteOriginally posted by tokyoso Quote
isn't it more fun to bring a pepper spray and a P&S
I think you are on to something here

Getting in close is the fun part..
02-27-2010, 05:59 AM   #18
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 15
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
This is absolutely f***ing fascinating. As-it-happens sports-x-photojournalism requires big fast expensive gear. We're not even in the same solar system here on Planet Pentax. At least we don't need pepper spray (or do we?) to survive. When do the paparazzis need bodyguards to counter the celebs' bodyguards? Photogs "with everything taped down", who "don't know what they're doing", crowding in like a flock of wasps. Makes me want to stay on a private island, guarded by orcas.

And in his spare time, he shoots flowers. His name is Flores. Woooo.....
On the other video that he is discussing his bags, he uses the 40d with the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 to snipe from afar. I liked to know if anyone has personal experience doing this at night. Most flickr night candid are taken very, very close at f 1.4, usually Canon L lens. In fact, after looking at tens of thousands of pictures, I could not find one that was over 135mm at night.
02-27-2010, 05:27 PM   #19
Veteran Member
fractal's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,549
QuoteOriginally posted by auto210035 Quote
In fact, after looking at tens of thousands of pictures, I could not find one that was over 135mm at night.
Which should tell you something by now. You need to start getting in closer to get used to it. Start by doing this in daylight first.

02-27-2010, 05:56 PM   #20
Veteran Member
tokyoso's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Albums
Posts: 723
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
This is absolutely f***ing fascinating. As-it-happens sports-x-photojournalism requires big fast expensive gear. We're not even in the same solar system here on Planet Pentax. At least we don't need pepper spray (or do we?) to survive. When do the paparazzis need bodyguards to counter the celebs' bodyguards? Photogs "with everything taped down", who "don't know what they're doing", crowding in like a flock of wasps. Makes me want to stay on a private island, guarded by orcas.

And in his spare time, he shoots flowers. His name is Flores. Woooo.....
I know, makes me wonder if he's gay.. j/k... glad i stick with my little puters...

QuoteOriginally posted by auto210035 Quote
On the other video that he is discussing his bags, he uses the 40d with the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 to snipe from afar. I liked to know if anyone has personal experience doing this at night. Most flickr night candid are taken very, very close at f 1.4, usually Canon L lens. In fact, after looking at tens of thousands of pictures, I could not find one that was over 135mm at night.


wiki pic sports gear



i think shooting at night with a big zoom makes you look more conspicuous. tammy 300mm f5.6 1/100s ISO 12800 midnight headless riders

02-27-2010, 06:10 PM   #21
Site Supporter
maxwell1295's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,704
I'd be looking at a Samyang/Bower/Vivitar/Whatever 85/1.4 lens. Yeah, it's manual focus, but AF is going to hunt in really low light anyway...
02-28-2010, 10:59 AM   #22
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 15
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by tokyoso Quote
I know, makes me wonder if he's gay.. j/k... glad i stick with my little puters...





wiki pic sports gear



i think shooting at night with a big zoom makes you look more conspicuous. tammy 300mm f5.6 1/100s ISO 12800 midnight headless riders

That's a really well done shot for such low light and f/5.6. Maybe an f/2.8 lens may not be necessary after all. An f/2.8 does come with the penalty of weight and size. Now, something slower and I can still conceal it under my trench coat
02-28-2010, 11:28 AM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,965
You might meet your budget with a K-x and a Soligor 200:2.8 (made by Tokina I think.)

I suspect however that what you really need is a 10X night vision device and a P&S camera.

02-28-2010, 12:39 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,588
Going by the book - ie according to the data from DXOMark's tests of camera sensors at
DxOMark Sensor

(look under the 'low-light ISO tab' for a sorted list of the cameras that perform best under low-light)

the best solution for good low-light camera performance will come from modern full-frame DSLR's - like the Canon 5D, Canon 5D2, Sony A900, Nikon D700, Nikon D3s etc. Some of these - eg the D3s or D700 - are EXTREMELY capable low-light performers.

So the ideal solution for you would be to save up for a D700, and then save up for a fast telephoto prime in the 300 or 400mm range - eg a 300mm f4. After spending about $5000, your problem would be solved. You'll be able to take good quality telephoto shots illuminated just about by moonlight alone.

In terms of more affordable APS-C cameras, if you want the best high ISO performance you need to buy either a Nikon D90 or Nikon D5000, because they top the charts in terms of non-full frame cameras that shoot well in low light. Or a Pentax K-x, because although it hasn't been asessed by DXOLabs yet, it shares the same sensor as the D90 or D5000.

Getting a Nikon D5000 or a Pentax K-x with a fast 300 or 400mm prime telephoto lens would be the most affordable path to decent low-light photography, or as others have also suggested, just get a fast normal or portrait prime and get in closer.

Or if you can't afford to buy, just hire a D700 and a fast telephoto for your stakeouts. Most camera rental firms will have the D700 available, as well as the long fast telephotos used by sports photogs and photo-journalists.
02-28-2010, 01:41 PM   #25
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
questions

Should you get this or that camera or lens? I dunno. Maybe we're working backwards here. Start at the end: What's the output you want? How can you get it?

You say your purpose is to shoot low-light candids from a distance. So, what do you care what they look like, and what are you going to do with them? If your goal is PEOPLE-magazine-quality candid portraits, you need big and fast and expensive. If your goal is surveillance photos, you can live with some high-ISO noise (and slower, cheaper lenses). Or if you find yourself in dangerous situations, maybe you need a cheap fast zoomy P&S, that won't break your heart when it's smashed by thugs.

And how will your images be seen? On video screens, home theatres, cellphones / PDAs, NTSC monitors? Will you print them? How big? How closely will they be viewed? HINT: Non-reflective glass, and matte-finish paper, and distance, mask MANY noise problems. I've shot high-ISO pix with a 1mpx P&S, shooped them smooth, printed them Polaroid-size on glossy paper, mounted them (behind glass) with actual Polaroids -- and nobody can tell the difference without a magnifier. Dullish prints on matte paper behind glass look smooth and saturated. Et cetera.
03-01-2010, 05:35 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
i think the best solution is a very fast lens like a 50mm F1.4

see the shots below taken with a 50mm F1.4 wide open using tri-x 400 shot at 3200iso (note about 25 years ago)

I also would today consider using my vivitar 85mm F1.4 and my SMC 135 F2.5



03-02-2010, 07:06 AM   #27
Veteran Member
tokyoso's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Albums
Posts: 723
QuoteOriginally posted by auto210035 Quote
That's a really well done shot for such low light and f/5.6. Maybe an f/2.8 lens may not be necessary after all. An f/2.8 does come with the penalty of weight and size. Now, something slower and I can still conceal it under my trench coat


you're really looking at what IMHO are the least common denominators. ISO 12800/5.6 (native is ISO6400) , 300mm 1/100s, no lights, and a novice photo taker w/ shaky hands (i.e. me) trying to shoot people riding bicycles (i.e. moving moderately) from across a bush. pp'd with open source free software.

with a f2.8 lens you can probably go down to ISO 3200/1600, which will make it a much cleaner image while preserving some noise, and presumably you move closer with 200mm.

but really the point I wanted to debate is you can take better photos with a P&S at point blank , if you got guts flash away it'll be even better!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
autofocus, body, budget, f/2.8, iso, k-mount, k-x, lens, pentax lens, photography, shots, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fast Lens telephoto for low light concert photography? superfuzzy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 49 12-02-2009 12:24 AM
Help-Taking Candid Pictures of People in Low Light trickashay Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 13 11-22-2009 04:22 PM
Low Light Photography Iann Cannon Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 37 10-22-2009 11:51 AM
Low light photography with a spotmatic? miniheli Pentax Film SLR Discussion 29 10-03-2008 07:14 PM
Low Light photography kshapero Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 06-27-2008 11:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:09 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top