Lens for dark photography

HI all,

I haven't been around for awhile but thought I'd check in and ask the experts My last trip to WDW I had an old Canon Rebel (my 40D broke right before the trip) and 50mm 1.8 with me. It did ok on rides like Haunted Mansion, POTC and Spaceship Earth but ISO 1600 yielded a lot of noise on the Rebel and 50mm on a crop was a really tight shot. I was a bit diappointed I could only ever fit two ghosts in a shot in Haunted Mansion and never all 3 hitchhikers. Everything else turned out pretty awesome though.

I am now planing a trip to Disneyland and am really struggling to decide what I want to take. My 40D is repaired and ready. ISO 1600 does a lot better job here than on the Rebel when it comes to noise. I have never used the high ISO 3200 setting it has, but I assume I won't be using it due to the noise level. Looking back at my pictures, I think I can also use my 17-55 2.8 on a few rides where I would use the 1.8 before to get a better zoom range. However, what I am really struggling with now is - do I want to replace the 50mm 1.8 with something else for the really dark rides and if so, with what? Would a 50mm 1.4 really make that much of a difference because really, it's just one stop. I also looked at the 18-35mm 1.8 from Sigma because it does give a wider zoom range at the same aperture but I've read and heard that it's quite soft wide open.

So really, my question would be - has anyone used both a 50mm 1.8 and something with either a wider zoom range or a larger aperture (or both) and can share their experiences?

I had the Sigma 18-35 for a few weeks before sending it back. Some here have reported great results. I was very disappointed in its inconsistent focus ability. When it hit it right, it was beautiful. But it missed at least as many as it hit.

You might not want to hear this after repairing your 40D, but if 1600 is the best it does, it might be time to consider an upgrade. You would be amazed at what the newer models do with higher ISO's.

Have you considered renting a different body for this trip?

If you're sure about wanting a lens, I'd find an older sigma 30mm f/1.4. It's personal preference, but I like that 30mm length for dark rides a lot more than 50 on a crop sensor.

It sounds like you have a good grasp on what you have versus what going to 1.4 will give you. ISO 3200-6400 is where I'd be looking. Is there any way to lower shutter speed to make up for some of this? I've had good results overexposing slightly at high ISOs and then correcting exposure in LR without a noise problem

Thanks for the quick reply

Just some quick background info: The repair cost for the 40d was only 10 bucks since I only had to pay for the parts and not the repair. it was a nobrainer really to have it repaired. Since then it's my outdoor "I don't care if it breaks" camera hence the one I am taking to Disney. My professional workhorse at work is a 60D which I use quite often. I do not like its ISO 3200 and 6400 settings at all because frankly, the noise is too bad my liking. I also am never able to fix it in post to something I am satisfied with. Since the 7D uses the same sensor, I could only upgrade to fullframe or switch to Nikon. That really isn't in my budget though atm as I would have to replace pretty much all my lenses. I haven't looked at the 7D II or the 70D yet though since the price tag is a bit outside of what I can afford atm so getting them was really out of question.

That's why I am looking to see if a lens change would give me a bit more range since I haven't been satisfied with using higher ISO settings.

The Sigma 30 1.4 you are referring to is the first Art version, right? How is focusing speed on that one in the dark? I doubt I'd want to use the 18-35 then if the focus is hit and miss - I really wouldn't want to spend hours in a queue again and again just because the camera didn't focus right. I didn't have that problem with the 50 1.8 luckily.

elmoandzoey said:

Thanks for the quick reply

Just some quick background info: The repair cost for the 40d was only 10 bucks since I only had to pay for the parts and not the repair. it was a nobrainer really to have it repaired. Since then it's my outdoor "I don't care if it breaks" camera hence the one I am taking to Disney. My professional workhorse at work is a 60D which I use quite often. I do not like its ISO 3200 and 6400 settings at all because frankly, the noise is too bad my liking. I also am never able to fix it in post to something I am satisfied with. Since the 7D uses the same sensor, I could only upgrade to fullframe or switch to Nikon. That really isn't in my budget though atm as I would have to replace pretty much all my lenses. I haven't looked at the 7D II or the 70D yet though since the price tag is a bit outside of what I can afford atm so getting them was really out of question.

That's why I am looking to see if a lens change would give me a bit more range since I haven't been satisfied with using higher ISO settings.

The Sigma 30 1.4 you are referring to is the first Art version, right? How is focusing speed on that one in the dark? I doubt I'd want to use the 18-35 then if the focus is hit and miss - I really wouldn't want to spend hours in a queue again and again just because the camera didn't focus right. I didn't have that problem with the 50 1.8 luckily.

Click to expand...

you should use "neat image" noise reduction filter

I use the Sigma 30mm 1.4 (original non-art) with a Canon 60D and shoot at ISO 3200 and 6400 and ISO 8000 - 10,000
I also use a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 mkII for low light situations but I would say get the original 30mm 1.4, it's only around $200 (used) and good for tight indoor shots

a few random pics

Canon 60D
Sigma 30mm 1.4 (original non-art)

ƒ/3.5 30.0 mm 1/160 ISO 3200



Canon 60D
Tamron 17-50 2.8
ƒ/3.2 17 mm
1/200
ISO 4000




60D
Sigma 30mm 1.4 non-art
ƒ/2.5 30.0 mm
1/125
ISO 3200

Bob, maybe I should clarify my high ISO dislike when it comes to the 60D a bit. In situations when I still have light and vivid colors, I do go up to 6400. Especially in sports when I need a fast shutter. In those situations I have not found noise to be that much of an issue. When I shoot in completely dark places though like I would in Haunted Mansion or POTC and have a lot of really dark backgrounds, I find the noise to be pretty bad overall. I had to do a few shots in dark caves a while back without the use of a tripod. Lots of black backgrounds with a few highlighted (flashlights) areas. I would say it was as dark as Haunted Mansion. Since I was in tight spaces, I had to use an ultra wide with f3.5. To compensate for the aperture I had to up the ISO to 6400 to even get a shot. The result was so noisy I couldn't use a single shot in those conditions. So in light conditions I am pretty satisfied with how the 60D handles high ISO. In really dark situations I just found it to be unacceptable for my liking.

elmoandzoey said:

Bob, maybe I should clarify my high ISO dislike when it comes to the 60D a bit. In situations when I still have light and vivid colors, I do go up to 6400. Especially in sports when I need a fast shutter. In those situations I have not found noise to be that much of an issue. When I shoot in completely dark places though like I would in Haunted Mansion or POTC and have a lot of really dark backgrounds, I find the noise to be pretty bad overall. I had to do a few shots in dark caves a while back without the use of a tripod. Lots of black backgrounds with a few highlighted (flashlights) areas. I would say it was as dark as Haunted Mansion. Since I was in tight spaces, I had to use an ultra wide with f3.5. To compensate for the aperture I had to up the ISO to 6400 to even get a shot. The result was so noisy I couldn't use a single shot in those conditions. So in light conditions I am pretty satisfied with how the 60D handles high ISO. In really dark situations I just found it to be unacceptable for my liking.

Click to expand...

Even in dark caves there is some light!

What I'm saying is just try a noise reduction filter on the high ISO shots. It doesn't matter whether it's a dark cave or something brighter, the noise reduction reduces the noise leaving the rest of pic. For me it works (but it does require knowledge of photoshop layers)

Look at the dark background in this pic

Canon 60D
EFS 55-250IS (original)
250mm
1/200
f5.6

ISO 6400

I've tried a lot of approaches, from Photoshop to the highly acclaimed Topaz DeNoise and whatever I tried, I did not like the results. I usually work at ultrawide ranges in the dark (10-22) and find I lose a lot of detail in those shots when denoising. That's probably due to the fact that generally I am not zoomed in on one object close-up but have a wide landscape type shot. The shots are either noiseless but very soft and without the desired detail or I have the sharpness and the detail and it's noisy.

Since I know that I'll be disappointed with the high ISO shots if I can't deal with the noise in post, I am trying to have as little noise as possible to begin with.

I am always open (and very eager) to learn though. Do you only apply the noise reduction filter in Photoshop or do you take additional steps? I rarely have good results with that filter out of Photoshop.

elmoandzoey said:

I've tried a lot of approaches, from Photoshop to the highly acclaimed Topaz DeNoise and whatever I tried, I did not like the results. I usually work at ultrawide ranges in the dark (10-22) and find I lose a lot of detail in those shots when denoising. That's probably due to the fact that generally I am not zoomed in on one object close-up but have a wide landscape type shot. The shots are either noiseless but very soft and without the desired detail or I have the sharpness and the detail and it's noisy.

Since I know that I'll be disappointed with the high ISO shots if I can't deal with the noise in post, I am trying to have as little noise as possible to begin with.

I am always open (and very eager) to learn though. Do you only apply the noise reduction filter in Photoshop or do you take additional steps? I rarely have good results with that filter out of Photoshop.

Click to expand...

noise reduction does require additional steps

take a look at this pic, do you see the noise?
does it look like the "details are lost" ?


Canon 60D
Tamron 17-50 2.8
f2.8
1/200
ISO 3200

OP, if you like shooting low light and are frustrated with noise, you need to save your pennies toward a 6D. The deals I see posted on Canonpricewatch.com seem to get better all the time. That's where I ended up after returning the Sigma 18-35. I wanted to be shooting wide and fast, and once I realized that Sigma 18-35 wasn't going to do the trick, I had to totally reevaluate.

That said though, I used the original (non-art) Sigma lens on my T2i for a number of years as my go-to lens for dark rides and was very happy with it.

Bob, I'll see about finding a pic where you can see my noise issues. Maybe you have an idea how to fix it. Yours look awesome compared to mine.

Mom, I am looking at upgrading to fullframe, especially for work. The problem I have is though that only my 50 1.8 is fullframe compatible. If I switch, I have to get a completely new set of lenses on top. So far I have been able to compensate for the low ISO usage with longer shutter times and/or larger aperture and did pretty good with it. There is an exception maybe once a year where I need a fast shutter in really low light (like dark rides or a dark cave without a tripod....). The 60D does do it for low light, I am just not satisfied with how it does in pretty dark surroundings. The expense for a decent lens I can justify though

Edit: So I went back and looked at the dark ride photos from WDW and the cave shots I made that I was not satisfied with because of the noise. It's been a really long while since then - I probably should have gone back to those pics a lot sooner. I underexposed them due to "fast" shutter speed I needed to hold the camera steady at 50mm and compensate for the moving car (in case of the WDW shots). If I had been able to use them straight out of the camera at 1600 ISO, noise would not have been an issue. I had to lighten the shots though which of course introduced noise in the really dark areas. And that noise I was not able to fix to my satisfaction.

To give you an idea, these two pics came right out of the Rebel at ISO 1600. I just converted them to jpg from raw and made them a bit smaller, nothing else. The 60D (and 40D) produce equally good pictures in such lighting conditions at 1600 and higher at 3200.





They were exposed just right so I didn't have to fiddle with the darks. The problem comes when I have to fiddle with the darks which happened at Haunted Mansion and POTC a lot.

Exmaple shot: ISO 1600, 1/60 (the boat was stopped so I took a chance) and f1.8, again with a Rebel.



Looking at it like that, noise is ok. It's still underexposed though, meaning I will have to fiddle with the darks. That's were I am running into issues with noise. What I am trying to do is get the shot right in the first place at a respectable noise level so I don't have to fiddle with the darks later.

So using a 30mm 1.4 would probably give me a couple stops, maybe 3. Which is basically what I had been missing before. D'Oh. I think I'll go for the Sigma first and see if I can do better exposed shots that way.

The Sigma is a great choice for dark ride photography. It's a much better focal length than the 50 as well. I was happy enough with my Sigma wide open at 1.4, but always felt my 50mm f/1.8 was a little soft wide open.

Something to keep in mind though is that your depth of field is going to be pretty small shooting at 1.4.

DOF hasn't really been an issue with the 1.8 so far - it did awesome on the rides in that regard. It also created some awesome effects on some of my Small World shots like this:



I also found my Haunted Mansion shot that was heavily edited. The ghosts are noisy and have some sort noise grid (??). In hindsight - is that really a camera noise issue or is that a projection issue (since the ghosts are no real props I think?) It also illustrates how much of a tight shot the 50mm was - there's only 2 instead of 3

as an owner of the original 30mm 1.4 it's without a doubt my favorite lens if it worked on a full frame it would be on there as well( it does sort of) on a crop the 30mm 1.4 is a no brainer if your after something a bit wider, the 50mm I find to long on a crop body tbh. Get the older one it's still a cracking lens and you can pick them up for much more reasonable price.

Thanks again. I was able to find a used Sigma 30 1.4 EX in my local camera store today and bought it - well, not really, I traded it in for my Samyang Fisheye which I wanted to get rid off anyway because I found it to be just too curvy for my liking. I think it was a good trade off.

I'll run some test shoots before my trip in May and hopefully will return with some good shots!

Congrats! I bet you'll love it!

elmoandzoey said:

Thanks again. I was able to find a used Sigma 30 1.4 EX in my local camera store today and bought it - well, not really, I traded it in for my Samyang Fisheye which I wanted to get rid off anyway because I found it to be just too curvy for my liking. I think it was a good trade off.

I'll run some test shoots before my trip in May and hopefully will return with some good shots!

Click to expand...

the Sigma 30mm 1.4 should give you good results indoors and dark lighting situations. (if you watch the DOF issues at large apertures) But going back to the noise issue, I use a Photoshop plug-in filter "Neat Image" that works with layers and channels, it's much better than the built-in or a stand alone type program. That pic above in my post I applied the noise reduction on the dark areas and building walls and left the lower foreground pretty much straight out the camera. If you do a lot of shooting with ISO levels above say, iso2000 it's worth the extra effort.
But then if you get a full frame like the 6D you wouldn't have to worry about noise for most situations

I shot a lacrosse game in the snow this week where I had to use higher ISO's because it was near sunset and a snow storm was moving in. I really need a full frame like a 1DX but that's out of the budget!)

Canon 60D
100-400 (original) @ 400mm
f5.6
1/2500
ISO 5000

Just wanted to report back on the Sigma I bought. Thanks so much to everyone who suggested it. I just love it! Up close the bokeh is just beautiful. I didn't think one stop down from 1.8 would make such a difference when it comes to that! I used my daughter's Olaf plush as a test object at about 5 inch distance and was amazed how I could totally blur out his carrot nose when I focused on his eyes. I never quite managed that with the 50 1.8.

I also did some distance (as in landscape) shots with it at 1.4 to see how it performs with depth of field with objects further away. DOF indeed is pretty small but I found if I shoot straight on it wasn't much of an issue for far away objects. If I shoot at an angle, it does become an issue. Well, I wouldn't really call it an issue as it did create some neat shots after all (e.g. shots like the Small World shot I posted above). I just needed to be mindful what I focused on.

I can't wait to test it out in a "live" environment where I need it wide open and only really have one chance to get it right.