Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Why Fast Lenses?
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
Jan 31, 2021 12:27:30   #
A. T.
 
Craigdca wrote:
I just joined UHH recently also. I’m using my dad’s old Canon T2i from 2010, the two kit lenses it came with, a Tokina telephoto up to 400mm, and an Olympus 50mm 1.8 lens. That’s enough for me to work with as I continue to learn the art, and I’ve been surprised with the results as I continue to improve with the older technology. One of these days I’ll invest in something more advanced for low light and Milky Way pics but for now I’m enjoying the journey. Thanks to the UHH community for supportive and Honest feedback that can only come from photographers.
I just joined UHH recently also. I’m using my dad’... (show quote)


I'm a budding 64yr. old photographer who has only been doing this for four years and what I would tell any newbie is to determine if this is your passion. If it is your passion, purchase quality equipment the first time. You can always sell and trade up however, you will take a severe beating on your gear and in my opinion, it simply isn't worth the loss.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 12:41:05   #
A. T.
 
BlackRipleyDog wrote:
My approach was to build up a stable of older pro-level Nikkor AF-D primes that are faster (1.4, 1.8, 2.0) than the best zooms today which top-out at 2.8. So based on the conventional wisdom, my primes are potentially superior to the so-called Holy Trinity everyone salivates over in term of noise and depth-of-field with outstanding build-quality and optics whose output would I put toe-to-toe with anyone's. Plus these lens can be had for $300 or less a copy.


I agree with you in terms of the older primes giving superior quality photos. I have the older non-CPU primes as well as the trinity; however, when the situation calls for photographing a moving subject, those fast, autofocus zooms will outperform my non-CPU primes every day of the week.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 12:51:12   #
A. T.
 
TriX wrote:
When I was just getting into digital from film many years ago, I thought the same thing - after shooting 400 ASA film, why would anyone need fast lenses with DSLRs now good to ISO 3200 or higher? I said as much to a pro at the camera store who knew better, but was kind enough (or smart enough) not to argue. Now I know better. Since then I’ve learned how much subject isolation matters and how much difference there is in IQ when you can shoot that indoor wedding or sports or candids with no flash at ISO 3200 instead of 12,800 (2 stops). I also noticed how that pro was often shooting fast primes instead of zooms. Now I understand that as well. Let me provide an example. Available light, 50 mm f2 wide open at ISO 6400 on a crop Fuji SOOC. Can’t do this at f4 (or even f2.8)
When I was just getting into digital from film man... (show quote)


Great photo; however, I can do that with the D4s at 12,800 with an f/2.8 zoom. Not being argumentative at all but this is a perfect example of appropriate equipment making the difference. I have a D850 and I could not use a 12,800 ISO and get a quality image with that DSLR.

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2021 13:09:56   #
A. T.
 
nikonbrain wrote:
The main reason from the beginning was during the film era you had a fixed ASA or speed of the film now ISO. Most of the best films were very low like ASA 25 and 64 these being the Famous Kodachrome . To shoot these films you needed a fast aperture just to avoid using a tripod . This style of shooting for early morning light and evening capture require high F stops for depth of field in landscapes and shutter speeds of 1/4 a second or 1 sec in some cases . In most cameras the lens remains wide open till till moment of capture when the lens shuts down to the predetermined aperture . Most lenses in medium format cameras and Large format cameras used leaf shutters today focal plane and electronic shutters make things much easier . So now lenses with fast apertures still make it easier to focus in low light situations because the more you shoot at base ISO the higher the dynamic range any camera can aquire . My Camera a Nikon D810 has 14.8 stops of dynamic range at base ISO 64 allowing Me to no longer shoot 3 frames to capture a HDR style image by just using one image and recovering the shadows without a penalty of noise . Same with the D850... So we will always covet fast lenses . For BIF shooting Fast apertures allow low light fast lens focus acquisitions of the target and tracking ability of even the eyes without it the lens hunts for focus lock .P.S. On Many Cameras today You lose auto focus points when the lens is a f5.6 verses a f4 or faster limiting to the central region of your view finder.
The main reason from the beginning was during the ... (show quote)


I have a question for you......is there an easy way to calculate the dynamic range of your DSLR?

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 13:12:55   #
Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio
 
Urnst wrote:
Fast prime and zoom lenses are huge, heavy, and expensive. What with autofocus and high ISOs with digital cameras why is such value put on having a fast lens? Slower can be just as sharp, albeit with a little less bokeh.


My 400mm f2.8 allows me to own 1 expensive lens that acts better than the 3 cheaper lenses I would have to use. I have the aforementioned lens. With my teleconverters of 1.4 and 2.0 I also have a 600mm f4 and an 800mm f5.6. You cant beat that combination if you shoot wildlife.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 13:23:35   #
gouldopfl
 
With mirrorless, I regularly shoot 6400-12800 for shooting stars and planets with very little grain. I shoot low light at night indoors at 3200.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 13:28:28   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
A. T. wrote:
Great photo; however, I can do that with the D4s at 12,800 with an f/2.8 zoom. Not being argumentative at all but this is a perfect example of appropriate equipment making the difference. I have a D850 and I could not use a 12,800 ISO and get a quality image with that DSLR.


Thank you, and the D4s is a low light king! When you need high ISO performance at 12,800 and above, there is really no substitute for fast lenses and a FF that is optimized for high ISO/low light. I can do that same photo with my 5D4 and my 85 f1.8 (a real bargain and a very useful lens as mentioned in a previous post), but I try to limit the crop Fuji to ISO 6400. I bought the 50 f2 for exactly this type of situation. I took a seminar put on by a series of photojournalists that shoot for our local paper some years ago, and one of the take aways was that you need to learn to shoot wide open (which implies accurate focus) for good subject isolation unless you have complete control over the background (which is rare unless in a studio).

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2021 13:32:28   #
lowkick Loc: Connecticut
 
Urnst wrote:
Fast prime and zoom lenses are huge, heavy, and expensive. What with autofocus and high ISOs with digital cameras why is such value put on having a fast lens? Slower can be just as sharp, albeit with a little less bokeh.


Narrow depth of field is one reason and bokeh is another. And imagine, with the ability of newer digital cameras to capture images in low light, how much more you can capture in even darker situations with a newer sensor AND a very fast lens.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 13:34:02   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
A. T. wrote:
I have a question for you......is there an easy way to calculate the dynamic range of your DSLR?


Just to throw in my 2 cents - look your camera up here: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm . I much prefer their DR testing methodology and results to DXOMark’s numbers (but that is a different discussion).

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 13:54:26   #
Winslowe
 
A. T. wrote:
There's not another Nikon DSLR that has the ISO capabilities of the D4s in my opinion.

Doesn't the Df have the same sensor as the D4s?

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 14:07:30   #
d3200prime
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Given you have all the answers, why are you asking the questions?


Maybe he is attempting to get you to think instead of relying on your snarky remarks.

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2021 14:20:09   #
Miami39 Loc: Florida
 
I shoot a lot of portraits. Large apertures produce shallow depth of field and isolate your subjects better. I have an older Nikon 85 f1.4D and it is great for that. No noise at lower ISOs. I try to keep my ISO less than 800, which in my view is high. Optimally, ISO is best around 100 for that size lens.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 15:01:06   #
Charlied123
 
Different Strokes for different folks. Some people get joy out of buying the best. Others get joy out of saving money and getting similar results. Either way works for different photographers. There is no right and wrong here.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 15:04:26   #
Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb
 
"Charlied123" I agree but the best may not be the lowest f stop.

Reply
Jan 31, 2021 15:10:59   #
Charlied123
 
I just took a 4 hour lens course and realized I don't need anymore lenses. If I had a special need for lenses that work in high dust conditions like motocross I might go for a pro series lens, but under normal atmospheric and lighting conditions the middle of the road lens gets the job done. The expensive ones make me feel better until the next hot lens comes out. Lately not enough to make me buy a new toy.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.