10 months ago
I was at a Tae Kwon Do tournament yesterday with my D610. The lighting was very poor. I had my 50 mm 1.8G and my 85 mm 1.8G. The owner of my sons school brought his 28-70 f2.8 that he uses on a D1x.
I took a few shots with the 28-70, but in order to get good exposure, I really had to crank up the ISO past 6400 which I didn't want to do. I also like to shoot at a minimum of 320 to stop action.
I opted for the 50 mm 1.8G which did a great job, but there were times I missed shots as the action came at me and I wasn't able to back up in time and the zoom of the 28-70 would have come in handy.
My sons owner told me that what he does since his D1x won't go above ISO 800 is set shutter speed at 250, aperture at 2.8 and ISO at 400. He knows his pictures will be underexposed but argues that he will deal with that in Capture.
I never really thought about doing that and I always thought it is best to get the best exposure possible, but it made me think about the trade-offs when shooting in suboptimal light particularly sports when you want to stop action.
1) Is underexposing preferable to shooting at a higher ISO and dealing with some noise?
2) Better shooting with the fastest lens possible?
Any thoughts would be appreciated.