Congrats!!!! Just imagine what a Sony A7s would have provided. That camera IS the best low light camera. What was the price you paid?
ORpilot wrote:
Use a tripod, then any camera will work. But if you
hand hold your shots then save your pennies and
.......
True dat about tripod use being a sort of "equalizer",
but that idea also supports favoring a camera or lens
with IS. IS and tripod both solve only camera motion
and not subject motion.
A sad fact is that in general, most fast primes lack IS.
So a camera body with in-body IS, plus a fast prime,
will be a more effective in low light than an "either or"
where you'd depend EITHER on lens speed OR on IS.
The most affordable in-body IS would be certain M43
bodies. Likewise the most affordable fast prime lenses
are for M43. M43 sensor size is about 75% of an APSC.
Percent figger slightly arguable +/- depending on how
you measure things. Despite that, it's big enuf to be
advantageous in low light as compared to "premium"
bridge cameras with fast lenses but mini nanosensors.
OOOPs, seems my comment is late-to-the-party
for Lynett, but I'm sure her Canon will serve the
purpose verrrry well.
Lynett [if you're still reading the thread], ENJOY !
You want a low light camera , you are close if you turn that $500 price tag into the. D500 Nikon. One of the best for low light also
Much more $$$ .
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.