Lens for low light,Dark scenes


foxycce

Link Posted 17/03/2009 - 22:25
o i am a noob to dslr phtography however i bought a 28-200 f3.5-5.6 lens but in low light it is very bad wont focus properly and images just look horrid,what can i do buy a vetter lens,in day light the lens is sweet as very crisp images and clean shots but low light they are appauling,whats does the f 3.5-5.6 mean

jackitec

Link Posted 17/03/2009 - 22:34
3.5 is maximum aperture at 28mm 5.6 is maximum aperture a 200mm raise the ISO to 400 or 800 or higher in low light conditions.
Jack.
Last Edited by jackitec on 17/03/2009 - 22:36

foxycce

Link Posted 17/03/2009 - 22:59
ok thanks

Anvh

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 00:38
a prime lens might also be a solution, you can get the 50mm 1.4 very cheaply these days, surely if you don't mind manual focus.
The f/1.4 allows more light to come through so you don't need to up the iso as much.

There isn't really a solution for the focus, the only thing I can come up with is the AF assist beam that are in some flashguns. They shine a red grid on the subject and the camera focus very fast and accurate then.

A flashgun is of course also a solution to have better light for your lens, if you bounce the light on the ceiling it looks quite natural.
Stefan


K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ

jackitec

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 13:17
I just bought the Pentax 18-250 and I'm now finding that I'm using it for everything as my gallery pics will show you, I just love it for an all rounder it's great and the quality is very good but I think I told you that before

foxycce

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 13:37
jackitec wrote:
I just bought the Pentax 18-250 and I'm now finding that I'm using it for everything as my gallery pics will show you, I just love it for an all rounder it's great and the quality is very good but I think I told you that before

whats the lens like in low light?

jackitec

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 13:50
Slow but I just up the iso and reduce any noise in my software.

Steve Chasey

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 15:05
foxycce - to see what you can get in poor light even with a fast zoom, look at my postings in gallery (click on my name tag in the the top left corner) and there is a shot taken of a dancer on an indifferently lit stage with the DA* 50-135 at F2.8 and ISO 1600.

You have to be brave and push up the ISO to get a good shutter speed, essential if you subject is likely to move. My image was shot in RAW and has had no additional work done on it.


Steve
In the Pack - Gripped K5 (SE),K7 & K20, Gripped MZ-S(SE)& MZ-S,DA10-17, DA12-24, DA14, DA*16-50, 50-135, 60-250 & 300mm; FA31mm/43mm/77mm Ltds; Sigma 8-16, 135-400 & 150-500
Half Backs: K10+BG,DA16-45, DA50-200
Backs: LXs,Super As and lots of A, M & K lenses
Impact Subs: 28mm Shift, K 135-600 (the Banahan of Pentax zooms ), 400-600 Reflex

paullucas

Link Posted 18/03/2009 - 21:47
The lens in question has no problems in low light, I am saying this as it was my lens. Try a longer exposure, or use the bracketing function situated above the AF button.
As for the AF in low light, any lens, more or less, will have difficulty focussing on an object as it will hunt for something to "lock on".
Try switching to MF oh and use a tripod or another form of support.

Like I said, I have had some great results from that lens both in daylight and low light.

Paul

Mannesty

Link Posted 19/03/2009 - 07:29
For low light and without additional lighting you need either a faster lens or higher ISO, or both.

K or A50/1.2 (manual focus), FA50/1.4, DA*16-50/2.8, DA*50-135/2.8 are perhaps your best options.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

sanderscapes

Link Posted 19/03/2009 - 14:45
Mannesty wrote:
For low light and without additional lighting you need either a faster lens or higher ISO, or both.

K or A50/1.2 (manual focus), FA50/1.4, DA*16-50/2.8, DA*50-135/2.8 are perhaps your best options.

Same as mannesty F2.8 or faster would be your best

foxycce

Link Posted 21/03/2009 - 13:18
what would i be looking at for a 2.8 lens

Mike-P

Link Posted 21/03/2009 - 13:29
foxycce wrote:
what would i be looking at for a 2.8 lens

Around 500 for a DA 50-135mm/Tamron 70-200mm f2.8
. My Flickr

RR

Link Posted 21/03/2009 - 14:01
[shameless plug] Or you could bid on my Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 - ebay item number 180337635137 [/shameless plug]
My Flickr

sanderscapes

Link Posted 21/03/2009 - 15:19
That all depends on if you want a wide angle or a telephoto i've got a sigma ex 50-150mm which i bought for 465 on srs but is now 585 which is a constant f2.8 generally you pay more for a lens that is f2.8
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.