pevelg
Well-known
I recently went to a friends wedding and took my lovely Mamiya 7ii with me. Sadly, I had no flash and the lighting was poor. I had Neopan 400 with me and Provia 400x. I started the wedding with the Provia 400x pushed to 800. Most of the pictures I was forced to shoot at a very low shutter speed, so for the rest of the rolls I pushed it to 1600. At some point I switched to the Neopan and shoot that at 1600 as well. After a abysmal amount of $$ spent on developing, I had another lab scan the photos and give them to me as uncompressed .tifs. The b&w photos were not too bad, though several underexposed. It turns out I don't really like neopan at 1600. Should have gone with Delta 400, which I really like. Anyways, the MAJORITY of the pushed Provia 400x looked poor, especially the ones pushed to 1600. It may be good for certain situations, but most certainly not a wedding!! :bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang::bang:
So, though I wanted to use just one camera and leave 35mm forever, I realize that there are many situations (low light) that I can not use my Mamiya 7ii and thus must resort to 35mm. I've used a hasselblad 500 and that is not how I like to shoot, especially it being slr (I have difficulty focusing without a split screen) and LOUD, so that is not an option.
I am wanting a camera that has these features:
-RF
-good for low light
-good light meter. I have a handheld meter, but prefer not to carry it around.
-Film
-I prefer manual controls, MUST have ability for manual selection of aperture and speed
-does not have to be an interchangeable lens, must be a good lens, and FAST, preferably faster than f2.0
-if ltm, I will go with the voigtlander nokton 50mm f1.5 most likely, or the 35mm f1.2 if one can be found at a good price
-if m, I am not sure which lens, I like the idea of the 50mm f1.1, but the price is too high at this time
-has click stops (thus no jupiter lens
)
-as low cost as possible, but really not that much of a limit (no leica glass, a leica body ok)
Ideally, I would pick up a Leica M body similar to the M6. The reason for the hesitation (other than cost) is that I want to use it ONLY for low light. I'd hate to pay that much money and not use the camera. I thought about the contax, but from what I've read I will most likely not like that camera. I've used the Bessa R3M, FED 5, Zorki 4k, Hassy 500cm, M6ttl, Mamiya 7/7ii, Graphex, a d200, and various point and shoots. Anyways, what is the opinion of our great members? I was also thinking about the LX1, but who knows when that will come out, and the price is too high for me at this time.
Oh, and if you wish to look at some of the B&W photos from the wedding, please pm me. In want to know if this is how Neopan usually looks like when pushed to 1600. I was disappointed.
So, though I wanted to use just one camera and leave 35mm forever, I realize that there are many situations (low light) that I can not use my Mamiya 7ii and thus must resort to 35mm. I've used a hasselblad 500 and that is not how I like to shoot, especially it being slr (I have difficulty focusing without a split screen) and LOUD, so that is not an option.
I am wanting a camera that has these features:
-RF
-good for low light
-good light meter. I have a handheld meter, but prefer not to carry it around.
-Film
-I prefer manual controls, MUST have ability for manual selection of aperture and speed
-does not have to be an interchangeable lens, must be a good lens, and FAST, preferably faster than f2.0
-if ltm, I will go with the voigtlander nokton 50mm f1.5 most likely, or the 35mm f1.2 if one can be found at a good price
-if m, I am not sure which lens, I like the idea of the 50mm f1.1, but the price is too high at this time
-has click stops (thus no jupiter lens
)-as low cost as possible, but really not that much of a limit (no leica glass, a leica body ok)
Ideally, I would pick up a Leica M body similar to the M6. The reason for the hesitation (other than cost) is that I want to use it ONLY for low light. I'd hate to pay that much money and not use the camera. I thought about the contax, but from what I've read I will most likely not like that camera. I've used the Bessa R3M, FED 5, Zorki 4k, Hassy 500cm, M6ttl, Mamiya 7/7ii, Graphex, a d200, and various point and shoots. Anyways, what is the opinion of our great members? I was also thinking about the LX1, but who knows when that will come out, and the price is too high for me at this time.
Oh, and if you wish to look at some of the B&W photos from the wedding, please pm me. In want to know if this is how Neopan usually looks like when pushed to 1600. I was disappointed.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
Since price is an issue, and you need just one lens, I recommend the Hexar AF. f2 is good enough at 1600 ASA for most situations, and the camera can be hand-held to quite low shutter speeds. The compur shutter gives you possibly one additional stop, over, say, a Leica. And the fast AF is a plus when it's dark.
The next step in price would be an M2 + Nokton 35/1.4. In practice, IMO, when it's dark you don't need a meter so often. Just shoot as fast as you can. Overexposure is mostly manageable in post-processing, for color negative in particular.
The next step in price would be an M2 + Nokton 35/1.4. In practice, IMO, when it's dark you don't need a meter so often. Just shoot as fast as you can. Overexposure is mostly manageable in post-processing, for color negative in particular.
Last edited:
kxl
Social Documentary
Stating the obvious, specialty items, in general, come at a higher cost. For a kit that would serve both low light and general purpose, I would recommend a ZI (with a Megaperls 1.3x magnifier/diopter) and a CV 35/1.2.
If it is to be used ONLY for low light, and you want cheap AND you want an RF, then you'd probably have to look at fixed lens RF's. The Yashica Lynx 14 comes to mind (f1.4), but good luck with that dim VF. There are others, probably not at f1.4, but sub-2.0.
I really don't see the point of getting a camera to DEDICATE to low light only. Some, given sufficient funds, may get a lens specifically for low light (i.e., to shoot at 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2) but not a body.
If it is to be used ONLY for low light, and you want cheap AND you want an RF, then you'd probably have to look at fixed lens RF's. The Yashica Lynx 14 comes to mind (f1.4), but good luck with that dim VF. There are others, probably not at f1.4, but sub-2.0.
I really don't see the point of getting a camera to DEDICATE to low light only. Some, given sufficient funds, may get a lens specifically for low light (i.e., to shoot at 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2) but not a body.
mfogiel
Veteran
What you want is Zeiss Ikon + 35/1.2 Nokton,( plus Tri-x in Diafine) nothing beats this combination for low light. You can have a look at some of my shots with this combo here:
http://www.flickr.com/search/show/?q=nokton&w=59177039@N00
There are some shots with the Nokton 50/1.1, but most are with the 35/1.2.
http://www.flickr.com/search/show/?q=nokton&w=59177039@N00
There are some shots with the Nokton 50/1.1, but most are with the 35/1.2.
aizan
Veteran
bessa r2 (used) and a 35/1.4 nokton.
David William White
Well-known
Seems to be a common wish-list. Not sure I can help, however, gotta say the idea of doing a wedding shoot without supplied lighting, and lots of it, chills me to the bone.
Medium format is the right call, but pushing colour film will only be acceptable to a rock band, or a wedding performed in haste during a civil emergency, or just before the ship goes down.
Even for weddings scheduled for afternoon summer days, there are two strobes in the trunk of my car, just in case everyone has to scamper indoors.
Sorry for the interjection.
Medium format is the right call, but pushing colour film will only be acceptable to a rock band, or a wedding performed in haste during a civil emergency, or just before the ship goes down.
Even for weddings scheduled for afternoon summer days, there are two strobes in the trunk of my car, just in case everyone has to scamper indoors.
Sorry for the interjection.
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
I agree with David in terms of picking the right (ancillary) tools - and lighting is the most pivotal thing in photography.
However, since we're talking cameras I have to agree with Memphis' recommendation of the M5 and a Canon 1.2.
I don't have any experience with Hexar or Zeiss Rangefinders, but the M5 is a heck of a low-light camera, the built-in meter is great, the viewfinder nice and clear - and it's not as big a camera as everyone makes it out to be.
The Canon 1.2 is a great lens that gives you a speed advantage over a Nokton 1.2 and gives a more classic, softer look.
However, since we're talking cameras I have to agree with Memphis' recommendation of the M5 and a Canon 1.2.
I don't have any experience with Hexar or Zeiss Rangefinders, but the M5 is a heck of a low-light camera, the built-in meter is great, the viewfinder nice and clear - and it's not as big a camera as everyone makes it out to be.
The Canon 1.2 is a great lens that gives you a speed advantage over a Nokton 1.2 and gives a more classic, softer look.
photogdave
Shops local
I'm quite happy with my M6 and CV 35 1.4 & 50 1.1.
But I'd think those lenses with the VF of the Zeiss Ikon would really be the best option.
But I'd think those lenses with the VF of the Zeiss Ikon would really be the best option.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I think I'd go with an M6 or Zeiss Ikon, and the 35/1.2 or a 50/1.4 of some sort.
pevelg
Well-known
You are very correct, thus the ":bang:" when I saw the results. Though I knew I was going to the wedding a month early, I had just recently switched gear from the RD-1 with 35mm Biogon f2 to the Mamiya and I did not have a flash at the time since most situations were fine without. The though about flash slipped my mind until three days before the wedding, at which point it was too late to order anything online. I even searched craigslist ads in a desperate attempt, but could find no suitable flash. Oh well, I was not the main photographer. The mother of the bride liked my work and wanted photos that did not entirely focus on the wedding at hand.
No, it won't just be used for that. With my current Mamiya system though, it is very hard doing low light work. I need a system that will preform very well in low light situations as a priority, with other capabilities as secondary and tertiary needs.
An interesting camera. Two question about it though. It seems that it needs the mercury batteries which are out of production. Also, a dim vf worries me. After being spoiled by the m6ttl, using cameras like the fed5 are a real pain due to the dim vf.
The Hexar is an interesting choice, not sure about all that automation though. So with a hexar lens, it has af? And it can use regualr ltm/m lenses too?
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
I've really grown to love dynamic long time exposure for low-light situations. There are not that many cameras with fast lenses that do that. The Yashica Electro (where the 35CC would be the best night-shot pick), or Olympus (where I'd lean towards a OM2n with Zuiko 24/2.0 or 50/1.2).
If budget and personal likes or dislikes do not matter, digital is king of low light.
If budget and personal likes or dislikes do not matter, digital is king of low light.
ferider
Veteran
There are two Hexars:
- the Hexar RF is an M-mount, manual focus camera. Costs around US 600-800. In a way similar to ZI or M7.
- the Hexar AF is a fixed lens camera with a fast and great 35/2 lens and IR-based autofocus. This is the one I was referring to. Costs around US 400 for a good example; has an in-lens leaf shutter and silent mode, quieter than even a Leica. Very, very usable in P mode. Basically you pre-select aperture and the camera adjust speed. But also usable fully manually.
Remember, for hand-holding, 35/2 is equivalent to 50/1.4.
Also, remember, a good M2 can be had for US 500 or so.
Roland.
Last edited:
thomasw_
Well-known
Well your cost limit specification of "...as low cost as possible, but really not that much of a limit (no leica glass, a leica body ok)" is rather vague. Better to give a monetary figure, as there is a lot of really expensive non-leica glass.
If you go with a low light 50mm lens, I'd recommend a M3 body because it has the best low light VF.
If you go with a 35/1,2, then a heavier camera like a M2 to balance it would be best. A ZI + CV 35/1,4 would be a good AE-able/lighter/compact kit.
If you go with a low light 50mm lens, I'd recommend a M3 body because it has the best low light VF.
If you go with a 35/1,2, then a heavier camera like a M2 to balance it would be best. A ZI + CV 35/1,4 would be a good AE-able/lighter/compact kit.
urban_alchemist
Well-known
From my experience, nothing... NOTHING compares to a metered Leica M and a Noctilux for low-light photography. I personally prefer the f1.0 (its signature softness is, IMO, a boon and makes it more forgiving despite its rather laborious throw), but if you're going for sharpness wide-open, the 0.95 is exceptional. The speed of either (but especially the 0.95) means hand-held shooting in near-darkness at reasonable shutter-speeds is do-able, even with 400 speed.
Recent examples:
Noct f0.95, Kodak 400VC (the grain is dodgy processing; labs in Geneva SUCK!)
Noct f1.0, Fuji Pro 400H
The Summilux f1.4 is exceptional as well, but if you're shooting available light, you'll really miss those extra stops...
Just my $.10...
Recent examples:
Noct f0.95, Kodak 400VC (the grain is dodgy processing; labs in Geneva SUCK!)
Noct f1.0, Fuji Pro 400H
The Summilux f1.4 is exceptional as well, but if you're shooting available light, you'll really miss those extra stops...
Just my $.10...
Last edited:
furcafe
Veteran
Obviously, much depends on your budget & preferred focal length, but if you're thinking of doing real "available darkness" work in dark bars & clubs, etc., I would recommend an M6TTL or M7 as the best film bodies since they have the most sensitive meters, EV -2 @ ISO 100 (a full 2 stops more sensitive than the Bessas, Zeiss Ikon, or Hexar RF, for example).
Last edited:
pevelg
Well-known
The reason for the cost limit is simply based on how much I am willing to save. I don't need a lens over 1k when I already have an excellent Mamiya 7ii system with two great lenses (80mm, 150mm, 50mm eventually). But, so I can put a number out there, I really would like to stay below 1.2k for lens and body. But, if I can get a very good fast lens with body for just $300, I would be just as happy. Getting a lens like the 35mm 1.2 will set me back anywhere between 600 to 800, depending on what used prices are (and I rarely see this lens in rff classifieds), so it does not leave much wiggle room for the body.
As for the Notilux.... NEVER. Way to much $$ for me. I do like the last photo though.
This I did not know. I do like the 35mm fov, not sure which I like better, 50mm or 35mm. I used to get great results at 1/15 with my 35mm biogon, even went below that at times. Subject stillness becomes a high priority at this time though.
Edit: I do prefer a faster speed than f2.0
As for the Notilux.... NEVER. Way to much $$ for me. I do like the last photo though.
This I did not know. I do like the 35mm fov, not sure which I like better, 50mm or 35mm. I used to get great results at 1/15 with my 35mm biogon, even went below that at times. Subject stillness becomes a high priority at this time though.
Edit: I do prefer a faster speed than f2.0
urban_alchemist
Well-known
Fair enough... everyone has their own pain-threshold (for me, low-light ability is paramount - why I chose to buy an f0.95 over an M9 when the opportunity presented itself). The Noctilii are very misunderstood lenses - so much more versatile than the "oooh... here's a static plant and pretty bokeh" for which they're usually used.
If you feel like it, the below search is a selection of Noctilux images from my photostream - many more where the second image came from...
http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w=7592660@N06&q=noctilux&m=text
morgan
Well-known
For around 1.2K I'd suggest a used bessa R2A and the cv 35/1.2. It's a great combination.
ferider
Veteran
For 1.2k, I come back to my other recommendation:
M2 + 35/1.4 or 40/1.4. Both excellent lenses. Attach a VCII meter on top and you are done.
Cheers,
Roland.
M2 + 35/1.4 or 40/1.4. Both excellent lenses. Attach a VCII meter on top and you are done.
Cheers,
Roland.
pevelg
Well-known
Interesting. I guess there is also the option of getting a hot shoe mounted meter like the voiglander one. That opens up a lot of non metered body options. Majority of low light scenes that I am in are building interiors and occasional dinners around town. Not much into the club/pub scene. Most places I go to I can usually shoot at f2.0 at 800. The extra stop to 1.4 would be most welcome though.
Right. I have nothing against the lens or those who purchase it, just not for me.
Though the besa is a decent camera, one of my biggest pet peeves about it is the rewind lever. When shooting vertical pics, the little lever will lift without me noticing. So, when I start winding, it jams into the body. Takes a couple seconds to figure out what is going wrong!
What are the used prices of M3's, M2's, and M5's? M6 is still above 1.2k majority of the time.