Which DSLR for 35mm and low light?

H

hexar_hp5

Member
Local time
11:07 PM
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
41
Hello all,

I was just about set for getting a 5d and 35mm lens for low light photography, then I heard that it suffers from vignetting pretty badly wide open.

A D700 sounds good but of course it's more expensive and I believe even bigger and heavier.

I really want to get more into lower light photography, which is why I'm looking at the full frame DSLR's and the 35mm length is due to my using HexarAF's for so long and most of my photography takes place indoors.

Any recommendations on which to get, the 5D or the D700, or something else?
 
Certainly the D700 is the current king of high ISO low light photography. But the original 5D is quite good through ISO1600 and even to 3200. I've not seen any noticable vignetting with my 50/f1.2, even wide open, nor with my 35/f2. That doesn't say much about something wider than 50 and faster than f2 of course.

...Mike
 
hexar_hp5 said:
Hello all,

I was just about set for getting a 5d and 35mm lens for low light photography, then I heard that it suffers from vignetting pretty badly wide open.
Click to expand...

No. This was what idiots were saying from when the 5d was the only full frame 35mm dslr on the market, and because everyone else was using APS-C sized sensors. Because a lot of the aps-c cameras use full frame lenses, the sensor is only using 70% of the imaging circle that the lens casts on the sensor. Because of this, any vignetting the lens has is cut out by the smaller sensor. It's what nikon users used to try and put down the 5d back when nikon had no full frame cameras.
Vignetting is there on DSLRs because they use the same imagine circle and sensor size as the lenses and film from film days. However, digital sensors best accept light straight on - when the light strikes the sensor at an angle the sensor the light is weaker, and therefore the edges of the image darken. This is why Olympus DSLRs have no vignetting - because they have a smaller sensor and lenses designed to have the light hit it straight on, even to the edges.

So basically the 5d with pretty much most lenses with show vignetting. So will the d700. So will the a900. So will the 1ds. It's not a camera fault, it's a characteristic of the full frame 35mm digital sensor.
The vignetting is not bad, it's similar to the kind found with most film lenses on film cameras. It isn't like the corners are black, just slightly darker when the lens is wide open. People that make a big deal out of it are seriously dim witted. Not only isn't it bad in the first place, it can be removed in lightroom, capture one, photoshop, aperture and pretty much any good PP program.

Speaking of high ISO, the 5d is no slouch and certainly the best value for money cam out there. I could have a d700, but nikon tones bug me, and the 5d is pretty similar in high ISO performance.

Here is an example of the "bad vignetting" on a 5d.

3952773216_f589d20c05_o.jpg

5d, 50mm f1.2L wide open


and here is an example of 5d high ISO

3952773006_9a4648f3e9_o.jpg

5d, 17-40mm f4L, ISO 3200 pushed 1 stop (iso 6400 equiv
 
You could get a D3, and use it for a while, then sell it and get a D700. The D700 won't seem so big that way, but the image will be the same.
 
the nice thing about the d700 is that you don't even really need fast glass for night and low light shooting. This was shot in a dimly lit diner at night, iso 12800, f2.8, 1/250th, with an 80-200 f2.8d @200mm. i apologize to anyone with a horribly slow connection, but i posted the large version to show off the grain- i mean- noise. I added the vignette on purpose in post. the d700 has a built in anti-vignetting system that does a great job.

3907663729_a74d8b3cff_b.jpg
 
fdigital said:
*the d700 anti vignetting thing only works in JPEG files, it doesn't apply them to RAW images.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that. In that case, I haven't found vignetting to be an issue at all, as I have never noticed any vignetting to write home about in my RAWs.
 
one other thing I will mention that has held true for me, and may be the case for others-

with a RF camera, 35mm is my preferred focal length. When I have a rangefinder in my hand, it is the focal length I "see" in. On the other hand, when I am using an SLR, 50mm is the focal length I see in. This may just be because I grew up using a 50mm lens on an SLR, I don't know, but I prefer the tightness. With whichever camera you choose, I highly recommend spending 100-150 bucks to get either the nikon or the canon 50mm f1.8. considering the cost of everything else on the photographic market these days, they might as well be free. I think the lens body of the nikon is a bit better built, and I find it a bit more to my liking for manual focus, but I own both, and they are both absolutely fantastic optically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom