Reading mode: Light Dark

Faster lens or Flash?

Go to last post
H

haenaa

Member
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, CA
I shoot a D50 with the 18-70 DX lens. Shooting context is indoor shots of my son (i.e. always moving around). I don't care for the washed out look that the built-in flash provdes. Clearly if I turn the flash off then I get the blurring from the longer shutter speeds (even at 18/3.5).

I've seen some sample shots with an external flash bounced off the ceiling and think that would be acceptable. I will likely be purchasing a prime lens in the near future (35/2 or 50/1.4 or 50/1.8) as well.

Will the faster primes give me enough speed to shoot indoors without flash? I realize the amount of natural light plays a role in this answer....lets assume shooting indoor during the day with some windows. I will ultimately own both a flash and some primes....just wondering what to buy first on a currently limited budget.
 
getting the DSLR is to have the luxury of lens... and flash... given limited budget, should go for lens either 35 f2 or 50mm f1.8 and get a SB600 then u have both... :)
--
Hun
 
For a little one running around, I'd say no to faster lens for now and yes to flash.

The other thing to remember is that you need a wide aperture to get faster shutter speeds which means less DOF so it is not easy to put all this together sometimes (the calculations) when your little one is running around. Even wide open and high ISO, I have trouble sometimes with f/1.8 to get an acceptable shutter speed when my niece is running.

I'd suggest go with a flash first, though even that will take some time to learn. I tried the 50mm f/1.8 on my niece and I ended up going to flash later on, would have had better results I believe with doing it the other way around first.
 
get a flash, it will allow you to do a whole range of things that you can't right now.

a good flash bounced around a smaller white room is like having a little studio setup right in your hands!

That being said here is my opinon on fast glass... that is you need to have "good" light to use with fast glass to get results. It can't be this yellowish dim light, because then even at 1.4 the picture would be yellow - just brighter.

If you're at a concert and there is this hot red light, well the picture still will be red, just more of it.

sure it will let you shoot faster (a lens) but you're not going to have any control over the light, and not really gain much ground - unless you know what you want, and that you have the light to do it.

get a flash with what you have, bump into iso 400-800 and have fun with it!
--
hi, I use a camera, flash, and lens. I'm also grumpy most of the time.
http://www.andrewthomasdesigns.com

I agree with Ken Rockwell 95% of the time, people waste too much effort arguing things that in the end really don't matter. It's all about going out, taking pictures, and having fun.

Which is what I'd be doing if i wasn't at work.
 
haenaa said:
I will likely be
purchasing a prime lens in the near future (35/2 or 50/1.4 or
50/1.8) as well.
Click to expand...
Before getting a prime, set your current zoom to the various focal lengths (you mention 50 and 35 above) and confirm that they're appropriate for your intended use. I have a Sigma 30/1.4 and find that even 30mm on a DX body (D200) is a bit tight for my tastes.

Jeffrey

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey Friedl -- Kyoto, Japan -- http://regex.info/blog/
 
The previous poster makes a good point about low depth of field, not being able to zoom to catch your fast moving child, and other issues in general that can crop up with primes if you are not use to them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of primes, owning the 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 myself, but that said it can take some getting use to. I'd argue it's in many ways a good way to force you to use your feet rather than zoom to really "think" in certain focal length, but that's more for learning purposes, not for the ability to shoot your child.

So bottom line, I'd make the higher priority getting an SB-600 and learning ways to bounce effectively. Bear in mind as well to get that first prime doesn't have to be costly at all: the 50mm f/1.8 is only a bit more than $100 and it can be great for portraits, low light, and is just in general a very sharp lens.

Nick
http://www.ashotapart.com/ - photoblogging nyc and beyond
 
What ISO setting are you using?
How old, how fast does your son move?
Are the photographs taken in one particular room or all over the house?
What flash unit are you using?

What I would recommend is:

1-) The 35mm F/2 shot at F/2.8

2-) If the photographs are mainly taken in one room, and if you already have an SB-800, get a second one to be used remotely in the background.

3-) Use fill flash, if the shutter speed and you son's movement permit, if not use high speed flash synch.
 
Thanks to everyone for your thoughts!

In regards to the 35 being a bit tight for indoor use....I have an idea for a data mining activity but am stuck at the moment. I would like to harvest the focal length data (from the EXIF data) for some of the shots I have taken over the past 9 months. I could then plot the distribution as a means to understand at what focal length most of my shooting is done at. I know...I'm looking to geek this up a bit, but I'm thinking this should be easy.

Does anyone know how I could go about this data mining exercise? I can get Windows explorer to display the focal length, but I can't paste that data into excel. The other thing I might do is use some masking tape to hold my zoom at particular focal lengths to see if I can shoot around the house.

I do think I'll go flash first. The comments about the shallow DOF/focusing challenges with the faster lenses is appreciated and understood. As for which flash, I'm leaning towards the SB-400. The smaller size would be of most interest for me, however I realize I can't bounce the flash off the ceiling if I rotate the camera for a taller portrait shot.....perhaps the SB-600. The increased price for the SB-600 is not a factor....purely the size.

As for getting a bit more advanced with multiple flashes in a room of interest. While I appreciate that this would yield great results, this is a bit over the top for me at this point and I would prefer the mobility that a single camera mounted flash provides.

Thanks again everybody. Comments on the data mining activity would be appreciated.
 
do this... (after you buy a sb600)

take the lens that you have and some duck tape and fix it at 30mm, then walk around taking pictures for a few days. Do the same thing at 50mm, and finally at 70mm. Then see how you enjoy each of those lenghts.

This would be easier than digging though a computer and looking at shots.
--
hi, I use a camera, flash, and lens. I'm also grumpy most of the time.
http://www.andrewthomasdesigns.com

I agree with Ken Rockwell 95% of the time, people waste too much effort arguing things that in the end really don't matter. It's all about going out, taking pictures, and having fun.

Which is what I'd be doing if i wasn't at work.
 
I am an amateur and I believe the SB600 is the one really responsible for making my pics better than a P&S.

I use it as much as I can. You will also benefit from a better AF illuminator.

You will learn how to bounce it and how to compensate exposure after just shooting some pics. It's very easy.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/actodea
 
Just a thought ...

If the flash you have gives washed-out results, why not try to reduce its power. You should be able to alter the amount of flash in 1/2 or 1/3 stop increments. Start by going down by 1 stop and tweak it from there.

but then, maybe you're just fishing for 'permission' to buy another lens ;0)

William
 
haenaa said:
Thanks to everyone for your thoughts!

In regards to the 35 being a bit tight for indoor use....I have an
idea for a data mining activity but am stuck at the moment. I
would like to harvest the focal length data (from the EXIF data)
for some of the shots I have taken over the past 9 months. I could
then plot the distribution as a means to understand at what focal
length most of my shooting is done at. I know...I'm looking to
geek this up a bit, but I'm thinking this should be easy.
Click to expand...
http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html

check out that simple, free utility. I used it to do the same thing you're trying to do. Here's an example of what it told me (shots from the previous week):

 
oops, phil already pointed it out :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top