fixbones
.......sometimes i thinks
Would you rather ISO1600 with f2-2.5 or ISO400 with f1.2-1.4 ?
What do you think.......
What do you think.......
Would you rather ISO1600 with f2-2.5 or ISO400 with f1.2-1.4 ?
- Thread starter fixbones
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 8
- Views 1K
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
I'd prefer the ISO400 approach, if any photographer/subject/camera shake could be ruled out, since I like shallow DOF's.
In real life, the ISO1600 with aperture 2.0-2.8 is more usable I guess.
In real life, the ISO1600 with aperture 2.0-2.8 is more usable I guess.
ChrisN
Striving
I'm actually pretty happy with 400 iso and f/2. The weight penalty in using a f/1.2 lens is considerable.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I've got to agree with Chris on that one. Learn to shoot hand held at slower shutter speeds! You'll be able to use much nicer film, such as Tri-X, and won't be worried about whether or not your lens is sharp enough at f/1.2 or if you'll have enough depth of field.
Impress your friends with your pictures, not your lenses.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
Impress your friends with your pictures, not your lenses.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
For what I shoot and how I like it to look as far as DOF is concerned I can live the higher ISO and smaller aperture combination. The few fast lenses that I own are/were only used at their widest aperture in a desperation move to just get a photo any photo. It depends on what you want or need. My old minimum was 800 colour film and a 2.8 wide for indoor use and that got to be a little shaky at times for grain and adequate shutter speed. The D700 and ISO 1600 solved that for me without the expense of getting faster lenses. OTH you can still use a camera that has good high ISO capability at 1/5/1.2 for even greater available dark shooting. Not really an either or situation if you are not talking film.
Bob
Bob
fixbones
.......sometimes i thinks
Personally i think the DOF of f1.2-1.4 is too thin and would rather shoot with the smallest i can for low light situations though i am sure a portrait photographer might differ. I suppose at the end of the day it also depends on the type/subject of photography
Mackinaw
Think Different
- Local time
- 2:03 AM
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 4,745
ISO 400 at 1.4, but I also prefer ISO 25 at F0.95.
Jim B.
Jim B.
fixbones
.......sometimes i thinks
Mackinaw, ISO 25 at f0.95 ! Wow...
Can i ask what do you normally shoot with that combo? General low light stuff?
Can i ask what do you normally shoot with that combo? General low light stuff?
FrozenInTime
Well-known
If it's indoors with normal/low nighttime room lighting Fuji 800 colour @ 1/30s f/1.4 is right on the margins for me with a 35mm f/1.4 lens.
With a 50mm f/1.4 ISO 1600 becomes advantageous.
With B&W there is a bit more scope to clip the shadows as black, but colour film needs overexposure to keep the shadows from becoming muddy so needs at least a stop more than you would get away with with a digital camera.
With a 50mm f/1.4 ISO 1600 becomes advantageous.
With B&W there is a bit more scope to clip the shadows as black, but colour film needs overexposure to keep the shadows from becoming muddy so needs at least a stop more than you would get away with with a digital camera.
Similar threads
