Building a Kit for Low Light Photography that Doesn't Require External Flash

sabzijoon · 07-28-2015, 03:38 AM

Hi everyone,

I'm currently in the process of acquiring new camera equipment. I generally shoot landscapes and macros. Besides this, some wild life and a few portraits and general family style shots. Currently, I own a Pentax K-5 with a Pentax 16-45/4 and Pentax 55-300 WR.

Sometimes, I end up taking shots in low-light or at night. For landscapes and subjects that are still, a tripod works really well. What kind of glass do you recommend for low-light or night shots where the subject isn't still? I'm not big on using the built-in or an external flash, which is why I'm asking about this. I was looking at the DA 35/2.4 to experiment with, but it doesn't seem like it's all that faster than what I currently have, which works well in most circumstances.

Thanks

Kozlok · 07-28-2015, 03:53 AM

The Sigma 30mm:1.4. I really quie like mine. It doesn't get a lot of love around here, but a used one is pretty cheap, and really quite amazing. Mostly the people who don't like it have never used it. Get the old Ex model, not the new art one. Apparently the new one has focusing problems.

It has pretty poor edge performance, but in practical usage, I don't notice it. If you buy used and hate it, then sell it again, no loss really.

**ramseybuckeye** · 07-28-2015, 03:55 AM

Find glass in the length you want and is as fast as you can get. Since you won't be using a tripod (most likely) avoid longer lenses, learn I out the lenses. It won't do much good to get a 1-4 lens that's not really usable until it gets to f4. I don't have any specific suggestions but I'm sure you'll get many,

Na Horuk · 07-28-2015, 04:56 AM

Originally posted by sabzijoon

I was looking at the DA 35/2.4 to experiment with, but it doesn't seem like it's all that faster than what I currently have

This is a pretty great lens, I think its some of the best glass you can get in that price point (other good glass being DA 50mm f1.8 and DA 40mm XS). It is significantly brighter than f4, but it is still not super bright.
But here is the problem, if you shoot at f1.4, you can take handheld photos even in fairly low light - but the depth of focus will be very shallow.
Anyway, Sigma 30mm is a good recommendation. Or Samyang 35mm f1.4, if you don't mind lack of AF.
DA 50mm f1.8 is a good choice, too. Decent for portraiture, very bright, but it might be a little too telephoto for landscapes.

lavascript · 07-28-2015, 06:10 AM

What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice.

I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids.

VoiceOfReason · 07-28-2015, 06:56 AM

Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would be a good one.

**Hattifnatt** · 07-28-2015, 07:09 AM

Don't forget the Sigma 35mm f1.4

MikePerham · 07-28-2015, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by lavascript

What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice.

I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids.

I often shoot theatre where the lighting is terrible for photography. My go to lens for this is the DA* 50-135 f/2.8 ...and like you I find autofocus works very well in that situation. I would use my DA* 16-50 f/2.8 if I needed wider; I use that at events where I can shoot late into the evening and when the only light is from a camp fire.

aleonx3 · 07-28-2015, 07:50 AM

I would use the 20-40 lens for this situation as I want something that is flexible, fast and also light to carry around. I also think that a SLR gorilla tripod would come in handy for long exposure for travelling purposes.

Venom3300 · 07-28-2015, 07:50 AM

The older and big brother to the DA 35 2.4... The FA 35 2.0

sabzijoon · 07-28-2015, 07:52 AM

Originally posted by lavascript

What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice.

I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids.

Regarding subject, I was looking for something to use in low-light/night time in general, not for any particular subject matter. Though, I'd expect it to be a combination of indoor shots for gatherings and a few out in the open that resemble street photography with or without people.

Another question is this, say that I have the following two lenses, would they be usable at all in low-light?

Pentax 16-85mm
Pentax 55-300mm

aleonx3 · 07-28-2015, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by sabzijoon

Regarding subject, I was looking for something to use in low-light/night time in general, not for any particular subject matter. Though, I'd expect it to be a combination of indoor shots for gatherings and a few out in the open that resemble street photography with or without people.

Another question is this, say that I have the following two lenses, would they be usable at all in low-light?

Pentax 16-85mm
Pentax 55-300mm

Given those two lenses, I would say no (or may be). Although you can still use it if you can manage to keep it at the wider apertures, but don't expect too much from the result.

**frogoutofwater** · 07-28-2015, 08:11 AM

I shoot in low light fairly often, and I often am unable to use flash because I'm photographing rescued or injured animals. Depending on the circumstances, I have a few favorite lenses:
- Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 is a versatile lens when I want a zoom lens but need something a little faster than my standard zooms (the Pentax 18-135 or 55-300). I like that it also has a short minimum focusing distances and quasi-macro capabilities. It is not super-fast, but I often find that I don't want to shoot much wider than its f/2.8-4 range (in order to have enough in focus in the image), so it's usually fast enough. Image quality is very good and the price is reasonable.
- It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations).
- I like the Pentax 35mm f/2.8 macro because it's fairly fast, it has macro capabilities and it's wider than the 50. But sometimes it's not quite fast enough.
- I love the Pentax 77mm f/1.8 when I need to go as wide open as I can and where I'm doing portraits. But I sometimes can't step back far enough to use it in the close quarters where I operate.
- I have the 1.4 teleconverter that I can add to these lens (losing a stop of light) - I find it works best when I'm trying to keep the kit to a minimum and I'm pairing it with either the 50 or the 77 to get a little more reach.

Bunch · 07-28-2015, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by frogoutofwater

- It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations).

Yep. My best low light lens.

lavascript · 07-28-2015, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by frogoutofwater

- It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations).

Quoted price is a bit of an understatement, actually. Currently available new from B&H for $107! As soon as my 4% rewards show up from my K-3 purchase, I'll be grabbing one.

07-28-2015, 03:38 AM	#1
sabzijoon Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 30	Building a Kit for Low Light Photography that Doesn't Require External Flash Hi everyone, I'm currently in the process of acquiring new camera equipment. I generally shoot landscapes and macros. Besides this, some wild life and a few portraits and general family style shots. Currently, I own a Pentax K-5 with a Pentax 16-45/4 and Pentax 55-300 WR. Sometimes, I end up taking shots in low-light or at night. For landscapes and subjects that are still, a tripod works really well. What kind of glass do you recommend for low-light or night shots where the subject isn't still? I'm not big on using the built-in or an external flash, which is why I'm asking about this. I was looking at the DA 35/2.4 to experiment with, but it doesn't seem like it's all that faster than what I currently have, which works well in most circumstances. Thanks

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Light for low key nude photography	Hattifnatt	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	12	11-16-2014 06:28 AM
K-3 doesn't focus in low light conditions	zoolander	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	10-28-2014 01:38 PM
A fast, sharp zoom lens that doesn't break the bank?	Rayn	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	18	08-31-2014 10:32 AM
I want a compact that doesn't exists	ismaelg	Pentax Compact Cameras	3	03-10-2013 06:24 AM
Adorama listing a lens that doesn't exist?	jsherman999	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	51	01-10-2009 10:43 AM

07-28-2015, 03:53 AM	#2
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	The Sigma 30mm:1.4. I really quie like mine. It doesn't get a lot of love around here, but a used one is pretty cheap, and really quite amazing. Mostly the people who don't like it have never used it. Get the old Ex model, not the new art one. Apparently the new one has focusing problems. It has pretty poor edge performance, but in practical usage, I don't notice it. If you buy used and hate it, then sell it again, no loss really.

07-28-2015, 03:55 AM	#3
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,291	Find glass in the length you want and is as fast as you can get. Since you won't be using a tripod (most likely) avoid longer lenses, learn I out the lenses. It won't do much good to get a 1-4 lens that's not really usable until it gets to f4. I don't have any specific suggestions but I'm sure you'll get many,

07-28-2015, 04:56 AM	#4
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by sabzijoon I was looking at the DA 35/2.4 to experiment with, but it doesn't seem like it's all that faster than what I currently have This is a pretty great lens, I think its some of the best glass you can get in that price point (other good glass being DA 50mm f1.8 and DA 40mm XS). It is significantly brighter than f4, but it is still not super bright. But here is the problem, if you shoot at f1.4, you can take handheld photos even in fairly low light - but the depth of focus will be very shallow. Anyway, Sigma 30mm is a good recommendation. Or Samyang 35mm f1.4, if you don't mind lack of AF. DA 50mm f1.8 is a good choice, too. Decent for portraiture, very bright, but it might be a little too telephoto for landscapes.

07-28-2015, 06:10 AM	#5
lavascript Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 394	What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice. I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids.

07-28-2015, 06:56 AM	#6
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would be a good one.

07-28-2015, 07:09 AM	#7
Hattifnatt Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Bucharest Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,625	Don't forget the Sigma 35mm f1.4

07-28-2015, 07:39 AM	#8
MikePerham Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Prince George, BC Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 642	Originally posted by lavascript What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice. I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids. I often shoot theatre where the lighting is terrible for photography. My go to lens for this is the DA* 50-135 f/2.8 ...and like you I find autofocus works very well in that situation. I would use my DA* 16-50 f/2.8 if I needed wider; I use that at events where I can shoot late into the evening and when the only light is from a camp fire.

07-28-2015, 07:50 AM	#9
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	I would use the 20-40 lens for this situation as I want something that is flexible, fast and also light to carry around. I also think that a SLR gorilla tripod would come in handy for long exposure for travelling purposes.

07-28-2015, 07:50 AM	#10
Venom3300 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 714	The older and big brother to the DA 35 2.4... The FA 35 2.0

07-28-2015, 07:52 AM	#11
sabzijoon Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 30 Original Poster	Originally posted by lavascript What is your subject? That will determine the lens choice. I just got a new K-3, and the autofocus speed and accuracy in my poorly-lit living room just blows me away. I couple it with my Sigma 28mm f/1.8(7?), shoot wide open, and have been getting some really great family candids. Regarding subject, I was looking for something to use in low-light/night time in general, not for any particular subject matter. Though, I'd expect it to be a combination of indoor shots for gatherings and a few out in the open that resemble street photography with or without people. Another question is this, say that I have the following two lenses, would they be usable at all in low-light? Pentax 16-85mm Pentax 55-300mm

07-28-2015, 08:00 AM	#12
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by sabzijoon Regarding subject, I was looking for something to use in low-light/night time in general, not for any particular subject matter. Though, I'd expect it to be a combination of indoor shots for gatherings and a few out in the open that resemble street photography with or without people. Another question is this, say that I have the following two lenses, would they be usable at all in low-light? Pentax 16-85mm Pentax 55-300mm Given those two lenses, I would say no (or may be). Although you can still use it if you can manage to keep it at the wider apertures, but don't expect too much from the result.

07-28-2015, 08:11 AM	#13
frogoutofwater Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 674	I shoot in low light fairly often, and I often am unable to use flash because I'm photographing rescued or injured animals. Depending on the circumstances, I have a few favorite lenses: - Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 is a versatile lens when I want a zoom lens but need something a little faster than my standard zooms (the Pentax 18-135 or 55-300). I like that it also has a short minimum focusing distances and quasi-macro capabilities. It is not super-fast, but I often find that I don't want to shoot much wider than its f/2.8-4 range (in order to have enough in focus in the image), so it's usually fast enough. Image quality is very good and the price is reasonable. - It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations). - I like the Pentax 35mm f/2.8 macro because it's fairly fast, it has macro capabilities and it's wider than the 50. But sometimes it's not quite fast enough. - I love the Pentax 77mm f/1.8 when I need to go as wide open as I can and where I'm doing portraits. But I sometimes can't step back far enough to use it in the close quarters where I operate. - I have the 1.4 teleconverter that I can add to these lens (losing a stop of light) - I find it works best when I'm trying to keep the kit to a minimum and I'm pairing it with either the 50 or the 77 to get a little more reach.

07-28-2015, 08:37 AM	#14
Bunch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 283	Originally posted by frogoutofwater - It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations). Yep. My best low light lens.

07-28-2015, 08:59 AM	#15
lavascript Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 394	Originally posted by frogoutofwater - It's hard to beat the Pentax 50mm f/1.8 for its combination of speed, size/weight, price (less than $200) and image quality. It's just long enough to be a decent portrait lens and it's often wide enough for some scenes (but I do find sometimes that I need a wider lens like a 35 for some situations). Quoted price is a bit of an understatement, actually. Currently available new from B&H for $107! As soon as my 4% rewards show up from my K-3 purchase, I'll be grabbing one.