Thomas78
Well-known
Hello,
I like to do some available light shooting.
Up to now I used several of my RF (Canon 7, Canon P, Voitländer R3A) with 50 mm lenses (Canon 50mm f/1.2, Canon 50mm f/1.4) with good results:
Canon P_Canon 50 1,2_Neopan 1600_02_004b von thomas.78 auf Flickr
Canon P_Canon 50 1,2_Neopan 1600_02b_009 von thomas.78 auf Flickr
But now I think that I would like to go for longer focal lengths in the 75 - 90 mm region.
I am wondering if a RF or a SLR would be the better system considering the following conditions:
- Handheld use at 1/30 - 1/125 s
- Lens 75-90 mm used at f/1.4 (if possible) - f/2.8
- Using 800 - 1600 ISO film
- Working at low ligh condition (normal to low room light)
I think that the slow shutter speeds and the low light would favour a RF while fast telephoto lens normally would favour a SLR camera.
Which system would you choose?
Are there some SLR which are better suit to slow shutter speeds (camera weight and mirror damping)?
Edit: As RF I have a Leica M3 DS, Voigtländer R3A, Canon P, Canon 7 as options.
As SLR I have a Canon F1n, Canon New F1, Pentax F, Pentax SP and Richo TLS 401.
I like to do some available light shooting.
Up to now I used several of my RF (Canon 7, Canon P, Voitländer R3A) with 50 mm lenses (Canon 50mm f/1.2, Canon 50mm f/1.4) with good results:
Canon P_Canon 50 1,2_Neopan 1600_02_004b von thomas.78 auf Flickr
Canon P_Canon 50 1,2_Neopan 1600_02b_009 von thomas.78 auf Flickr
But now I think that I would like to go for longer focal lengths in the 75 - 90 mm region.
I am wondering if a RF or a SLR would be the better system considering the following conditions:
- Handheld use at 1/30 - 1/125 s
- Lens 75-90 mm used at f/1.4 (if possible) - f/2.8
- Using 800 - 1600 ISO film
- Working at low ligh condition (normal to low room light)
I think that the slow shutter speeds and the low light would favour a RF while fast telephoto lens normally would favour a SLR camera.
Which system would you choose?
Are there some SLR which are better suit to slow shutter speeds (camera weight and mirror damping)?
Edit: As RF I have a Leica M3 DS, Voigtländer R3A, Canon P, Canon 7 as options.
As SLR I have a Canon F1n, Canon New F1, Pentax F, Pentax SP and Richo TLS 401.
Wulfthari
Well-known
Mmm...the only 85 mm that would fit the bill IMO would be the Canon FD 85 mm f1.2 L, I don't know if in the rangefinder world there is anything equivalent.
Finglas
Established
Thomas, I actually use both the RF and SLR with 75mm lens.
The 75mm f2.5 Leica summarit lens on the RF,
The 75mm f2.5 Voigtlander SL1 on the SLR (in nikon F mount).
Both lens are light and small, 320g and 250g and work very well in all light
in low light - indoors by the window, reflected light, even table lamps they are served me well at 1/30 shutter speed on ISO 100 or ISO 200 film.
If you really mean to use ISO 800 to 1600 - then both will simply ace it.
John
The 75mm f2.5 Leica summarit lens on the RF,
The 75mm f2.5 Voigtlander SL1 on the SLR (in nikon F mount).
Both lens are light and small, 320g and 250g and work very well in all light
in low light - indoors by the window, reflected light, even table lamps they are served me well at 1/30 shutter speed on ISO 100 or ISO 200 film.
If you really mean to use ISO 800 to 1600 - then both will simply ace it.
John
Wulfthari
Well-known
f2.5 is NOT fast enough for this application IMO, at this point even the Canon FD 85 mm f1.8 would be better but for what the OP wants to do he needs something even faster and sharper.
Finglas
Established
I am surprised how well the f2.5 works for me. I simply couldn't afford the f2 or wider and anyway the size and weight are very comfortable in low light. While it's true that wider is better - I can only offer my experience on what I use - also the OP did mention possibility of f2.8, just my 2c
x-ray
Veteran
The 85 1.2 is about as close to magic as you can get. I had the EOS version and used it on both my 1DsII and EOS3. Amazing lens. I changed to Nikon and sold the Canon gear and bought a Nikkor 85 1.4D and like it about as much. It's very close in image quality to the Canon and just 1/3 stop slower. F1.2 to f1.4 is only a third of a stop not 1/2.
I've owned the 75 f1.4 Summilux for years and just won't part with it. It's a fantastic lens for available light. Many of my documentary images were shot under terrible light using that lens wide open. The downside is they are really expensive now. I think I bought mine for $1400.
Any of the Nikkor 85 f1.4's are excellent. Many folks rave about the new G lens but it won't work on mechanical bodies. You have to have something like an F5, F6 or F100. I keep an F100 just to use my G glass on.
The attached photo was with the 75 Summilux at f1.4
Attachments
Corran
Well-known
The Nikon 85/1.4D is indeed awesome. Probably my most used lens on my D800/D700 for portraiture and wedding stuff.
If you are sticking to RFs maybe the Canon 85/1.5 LTM lens? IgorCamera has one for $545 with "coating marks," whatever that means. Or maybe just the f/1.9 for cheaper (or a LTM Nikkor 85/2, a fantastic lens).
If you are sticking to RFs maybe the Canon 85/1.5 LTM lens? IgorCamera has one for $545 with "coating marks," whatever that means. Or maybe just the f/1.9 for cheaper (or a LTM Nikkor 85/2, a fantastic lens).
Wulfthari
Well-known
I don't have direct experience with, the Nikkor and the Pentax 85 mm f1.4 but I heard good things about them, I know the FD 50 and 85mm f1.2 L and I've seen the results, so I recommend them.
The OP has a Canon F-1n and I would suggest to use it with the AE aperture priority prism and one of those lenses for candid shots.
x-ray
Veteran
x-ray
Veteran
raid
Dad Photographer
I use Canon 85/1.2L FD, Leica Summilux 75/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4 QBM.
The Canon, Rollei, and Leica mount lenses can be used on M 4/3 cameras, while the Summilux can also be used on Leica M cameras.
The Canon, Rollei, and Leica mount lenses can be used on M 4/3 cameras, while the Summilux can also be used on Leica M cameras.
Pioneer
Veteran
If you don't need autofocus then the Vivitar/Rokinon/Bower 85/1.4 slr lenses are a wonderful, low-cost option.
I currently use a very nice SMC Pentax FA 85/1.4, which I love. But before I was able to save enough for this lens I used the Rokinon 85/1.4. Its biggest downfall would be the minimum focus distance, which is a little longer than I liked, but the performance was top notch.
The Summilux 75/1.4 is truly an awesome lens if you can afford it. Sadly, the cost of this lens is still more than what I am willing to spend.
I currently use a very nice SMC Pentax FA 85/1.4, which I love. But before I was able to save enough for this lens I used the Rokinon 85/1.4. Its biggest downfall would be the minimum focus distance, which is a little longer than I liked, but the performance was top notch.
The Summilux 75/1.4 is truly an awesome lens if you can afford it. Sadly, the cost of this lens is still more than what I am willing to spend.
ferider
Veteran
Interesting question that I was just contemplating myself, Thomas.
First, remember that a 50mm at 0.7m distance gives you a similar crop as a 75/90mm at 1m distance. And a 50mm is easier to hand hold in the dark. You could buy one of several competent short min. focus fast 50s in M-mount instead of a tele (for example the new 50/1.5 M-Nokton).
That being said, until now, I have preferred to use Rangefinders for short teles, in particular the M3 in combination with the 75mm Summilux (the only RF tele I know with 0.7m min. focus). If not too expensive, M3 +75/1.4 is a great available light portrait combo. Note that I use a different technique when focusing, when compared to normal day light shooting: I focus first, and then move my body until the patch matches, recompose and shoot. The 90/2 v3 is much cheaper than the 75/1.4 and great on the M3 as well.
I was asking the same question when starting to play with AF film SLRs in the last few weeks: an SLR with bright viewfinder and good available light AF should do wonders for moving subjects, no ?
So just yesterday I found this Minolta AF 85/1.4 and I'm eagerly waiting to try it out on my to me new Alpha 9. The camera/lens combo is almost 5 times cheaper than just the 75 M-Summilux alone. It's quiet and hefty, nicely damped, AF is very fast, so I'm looking forward to trying this combo over the upcoming holidays. I'll report back .....
Roland.
PS: A couple of older Summilux shots:
Roland.
First, remember that a 50mm at 0.7m distance gives you a similar crop as a 75/90mm at 1m distance. And a 50mm is easier to hand hold in the dark. You could buy one of several competent short min. focus fast 50s in M-mount instead of a tele (for example the new 50/1.5 M-Nokton).
That being said, until now, I have preferred to use Rangefinders for short teles, in particular the M3 in combination with the 75mm Summilux (the only RF tele I know with 0.7m min. focus). If not too expensive, M3 +75/1.4 is a great available light portrait combo. Note that I use a different technique when focusing, when compared to normal day light shooting: I focus first, and then move my body until the patch matches, recompose and shoot. The 90/2 v3 is much cheaper than the 75/1.4 and great on the M3 as well.
I was asking the same question when starting to play with AF film SLRs in the last few weeks: an SLR with bright viewfinder and good available light AF should do wonders for moving subjects, no ?
So just yesterday I found this Minolta AF 85/1.4 and I'm eagerly waiting to try it out on my to me new Alpha 9. The camera/lens combo is almost 5 times cheaper than just the 75 M-Summilux alone. It's quiet and hefty, nicely damped, AF is very fast, so I'm looking forward to trying this combo over the upcoming holidays. I'll report back .....
Roland.
PS: A couple of older Summilux shots:
Roland.