Best low-light camera for portrait shots?

[R Kahn]

I most commonly take non-flash, low-light portrait shots using a camera I keep in my handbag (i.e. non-studio). I've used the F30 and then the f31fd. They were excellent at low light sensitivity but the image quality has been lacking. I recently gave my f31fd to a friend in order to get f50fd. Unfortunately, the f50fd is unusable at ISO800 or above which makes it unsuitable for non-flash low-light photography. I recognize that for other users, the f50fd is an upgrade but these users are enjoying brighter (outdoor?) light levels. I'll return the f50fd and would appreciate a recommendation.

Ideally, I'd prefer a small camera with similar low-light sensitivity. Unfortunately, even cameras at double the weight such as Canon G9 seem to have poor low-light sensitivity. I've therefore started looking at full SLR's (but please let me know if I've missed any midsize contenders).

I've researched the Fuji S5 Pro which is expensive and heavy ($1800, 820g) but is otherwise my first choice. At a similar price/weight category is Nikon D300 ($1800, 825g) and Canon 40d ($1400, 822g). A step down in price and weight are Nikon d40x ($600, 522g) and Canon 400D/XTi ($700, 556g). All prices and weights are without lens.

Since most of these reviews don't compare the sensitivities and none compare to the F31fd, I'd appreciate other users' opinions.

 

[itt]

Have you thought about the Pentax K100 DSLR with a 50mm prime lens.
That is small, cheap and low weight.
Remember the 50mm acts pretty much like an 75mm lens after the crop factor.

Which is close to the 85mm ("Classic" portrait focal length), for a fraction of the price.

Another option would the Canon Rebel XT with 50mm prime lens.

The Fuji S5 is probably the best camera there is for Portraits, provided you don't mind the $$ or the size and weight.

The cheapest you can go for is a Refurbished F700 for $100 but the Bokeh is not good enough (same as Finepix FXX).

--

 

[Roonal]

Off the top of my head I'm guessing one of the lightest (if not lightest) DSLR with lens (for portraits) would be the Pentax K100D (original or "Super") along with one of the "pancake" prime lenses Pentax makes.

Here are a 3 attached to the larger (and heavier) Pentax K10D

40mm/2.8
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_40_28/index.htm

43mm/1.9
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_43_19/index.htm

70mm/2.4
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/pentax_70_24/index.htm

--
Good Day,
Roonal

'Money doesn't buy happiness, but it makes for an extravagant depression' by golf tournament sportscaster

 

[Mike920]

Maybe it was the settings you were using as I have excellent results with both my F30 and F31, as well as seeing some serious photos taken with an F20. True, you can't beat a DSLR with good glass and a APS or full frame sensor. However, if you want portability and pocketability as well as the ability to shoot in all lighting conditions without (and with) flash, the F10/11/20/30/31 can't be beat.

Best regards,
Mike

 

[Over Achiever]

Those lenses look very impressive. Are they limited to Pentax bodies?
--



'It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you got.'

 

[igilligantoo]

I have the F30 and the S6000 and I have got some fairly good shots in low light. But...

I just got a 50mm 1.4 for my new K100d. Good usable hi Iso on this 6mp camera. And the camera is cheap. The FA 50 1.4 is not as nice as the limited lenses that Roonal mentioned. Those are amazing lenses. But the FA 50 does pretty good.

Now I am a newbie with it so many could do much better.

Here are some shots from the first night I had the 50mm F1.4.... Very low light at the front desk at work. handheld with IS on.
I talked my coworkers into modeling... haha





And here is a shot of my nephew with an old Manual 35mm pentax prime that I got for 15 bucks.



AND a 100% crop of that shot...



I am not saying that this is the best lowlight option, but it is a very inexpensive option for portraits IMO. Someone with some experience could do much better.
Good luck on your search.



my girls...
--
gus
Get what makes you happy...
Anything less makes you less happy!

 

[DLacouture]

Hello!

I was a low-light advocate for some time. Even found myself a nice Porst 55mm f/1.2 some months ago to put on my film pentaxes (and that's quite a lightscoop!)...

Then I discovered the joice of flash photography, and believe me, low-light is gone...

My advice would be : go for an entry-middle level dslr with an appropriate lens, and then use the money to build yourself a nice lightning pack (don't need much : one (or two!) wireless flash, or PocketWizards with older flashes, or go Nikon, then a diffuser)...

There are "off-camera flash" communities all around the net...

 

[R Kahn]

My advice would be : go for an entry-middle level dslr and then use the money to build yourself a nice lightning pack (don't need much : one (or two!) wireless flash, or PocketWizards with older flashes, or go Nikon, then a diffuser)...

I've not looked into wireless flashes. If I go for a Nikon d40/d40x or Pentax K100/K100d and, say, a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM lens, what's a good wireless flash setup? What do you mean by "go Nikon then a diffuser"?

I'm a spontaneous photographer so everything has to fit in my bag (i.e. I'd only be willing to carry one external flash, not two). It'd be important that I could capture the shot with minimal setup (i.e. no metering, exposure bracketing, etc). Does one use the on-camera flash in addition to the off-camera flash? Does one have to install a wireless transponder to the camera's hotshoe or do these cameras already have something built in? Which (compact) flash do you recommend and do they already have the wireless part built in?

 

[R Kahn]

I notice the Nikon d40x (as opposed to the d40) has moved to an "all mechanical shutter" which supposedly reduces flash flexibility. Do these wireless flashes work better with a shutter which isn't all mechanical?

 

[Roonal]

Those lenses look very impressive. Are they limited to Pentax bodies?

As far as I know. In my limited research haven't seen any other similar "pancake" type lenses (neither current lenses nor older manual focus lenses) from the other manufacturers.

Perhaps someone else knows of some.

Seems to me that for a light-weight good interchangeable lens camera before digital, a 35mm range-finder was perhaps the way to go. Never had one, but apparently quiet (or quieter) operation, overall smaller than a SLR, etc, etc.

--
Good Day,
Roonal

'Money doesn't buy happiness, but it makes for an extravagant depression' by golf tournament sportscaster

 

[DLacouture]

Hello!

I said Nikon, because they offer the best Flash system for beginners in DSLR IMHO...

Up to 4 groups can be separately handled by the body (meaning you can adjust each group level from your DSLR).

Pentax allows only one flash group...

A diffuser (or even a softbox) is great if there is no nearby wall to bounce the light on...

Now you can go fully manual, but it's a little bit harder with more than one flash...

I know for sure that with a film Pentax and any TTL flash bounced on a wall, the results look very natural looking, and really pleasing...

Following pic was made by bouncing the flash on the nearby white wall, on the right...



Not UberArtistic, but that's all I have available right now!

The reflections in the bowl shows the white wall illuminated by the flash, some bulbs on the ceiling, and a window...

Event using one flash in manual is really easy to do, with digital easing things down by allowing instant review of the results...

 

[Kim Letkeman]

... something like a used D2H? Pro body, superb high ISO in RAW (D2Hs adds great high ISO in jpeg) and extremely responsive. 4.1mp that are so sharp you can print posters. I have the following late evening portrait (a bride the night before the wedding) hung on the wall in 12x18 and it is razor sharp.



These bodies are going these days for a grand. A steal if you like what they can do.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos

 

[ajay67]

why do you think F50 can produce better quality image than F30/31? just by looking at the no of pixels? some people here would rather switch the other way round

anyway good luck with your DSLR purchase. i'm sure any of the current cheap new DSLR should suffice with the right low light lens. as for D40/x, the only issue u need to consider is that most low light (ie big aperture) nikon compatible prime lens won't autofocus with it

--
rgds
ajay

 

[Mike920]

Hi Kim,

It is so nice to see you here again. Your photo is, as expected, razor sharp. I assume you got your beloved F11 back from repair? Sorry to see Fuji jumping in on the MP race. Things will not be the same for some time, starting with the F40.

I think it would be a good time to repost some of your excellent ISO 3200 and 1600 photos that you were kind enough to post in the past. You would be doing a "public service" in educating people on what these cameras are capable of doing with the appropriate settings.

Best regards to you and yours.
Mike

 

[Kim Letkeman]

It is so nice to see you here again. Your photo is, as expected,
razor sharp. I assume you got your beloved F11 back from repair?
Sorry to see Fuji jumping in on the MP race. Things will not be the
same for some time, starting with the F40.

Hi Mike. Nice to hear from you again too. Yeah, Fuji has made a disappointing decision to run with the pack ... I hope they have some master plan. But I fear for the loss of the magic 6mp sensor ...

I sure did get my F11 out of repair and it is as fantastic as ever ... my opinion of course. I traveled a lot this year (for me, anyway) ... including three trips to London ... for one of them, I supplemented the dSLR(s) with the F11 and recorded parts of the flight, e.g.







I still like the clarity you get from this thing.

I think it would be a good time to repost some of your excellent ISO
3200 and 1600 photos that you were kind enough to post in the past.
You would be doing a "public service" in educating people on what
these cameras are capable of doing with the appropriate settings.

Sure ... I'll do that in a separate post.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos