50 mm f/1.8 for low lighting?

[*pixie*]

I have a Canon XS that I have had for a couple of months. Took it with me to WDW in October and was really happy with the pics I got with it, considering I only had a short time to use it beforehand and I only had the kit lens.

Now, we're starting basketball season and my pics are awful, which I expected with the kit lens. Really, really dark. I've been trying to read up on different lenses, but right now I don't want to shell out the big bucks for the perfect lens. We live in a small town, so I am always able to get front row seats so distance isn't an issue for me. It's just the darn lighting.

Would the 50mm f/1.8 lens help me at all?

 

[photo_chick]

The 50mm f/1.8 will make it a lot easier to get a faster shutter speed in low light. IMO, it's probably the best bang for your buck lens wise from Canon.

 

[pjacobi]

The 50mm f/1.8 will make it a lot easier to get a faster shutter speed in low light.

Courtesy of the laws of physics, you also get short depth of field and loss of sharpness. You need to develop skills to use this lens effectively to minimize the unwanted properties.

This is certainly a good lens to use in low light situations, but don't expect it to be a magic solutions to guarantee perfect pictures in low light.


-Paul

 

[mom2rtk]

If you're courtside, then you might find the 50mm focal length a little tight. I shot my daughter's basketball season last year with my 30mm f1.4 and really enjoyed that. It's more expensive than the 50mm f1.8, but I think they also sell a 30mm f1.8.

 

[Marlton Mom]

Let me preface my remarks by saying that I'm a Nikon person and I don't really know about your particular model of Canon.... but I do have experience with a lens similar to the one you are considering that may be helpful to you.

The first time I used my Nikon - AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX Lens with my D90 I was really surprised how shallow the Depth of Field was when shooting at a distance.

I would really use a good depth of field calculator with this type of lens (50mm f/1.8).

I have an app downloaded to my Droid phone just for this purpose.

If you don't have a smart phone with apps available you can access this info online at http://www.dofmaster.com/charts.html I believe this site has calculations for your camera model.

This site: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm Is great at helping one understand the whole depth of field business in the first place. It explains the formerly mysterious "circles of confusion" and it has pictures for the visual learner.

The Depth of field calculator is a bit tricky to use on this site because it lists sensor sizes instead of camera models. I recommend sticking with the first Depth of field (DOF) calculator I listed in the link above.

Good luck and keep in mind you might be trading one problem for another and spending a chunk of change unless you really know the capabilities and limitations of that 50mm f/1.8 lens.

Other things that you might want to consider is seeing if you can alter the exposure modes and white balance to compensate for the gym lighting. Like I said before I'm not a Canon person but your camera manual might provide some info to help you with this difficult lighting and shutter speed problem.

Good luck!

Marlton Mom

 

[photo_chick]

Courtesy of the laws of physics, you also get short depth of field and loss of sharpness. You need to develop skills to use this lens effectively to minimize the unwanted properties.

This is certainly a good lens to use in low light situations, but don't expect it to be a magic solutions to guarantee perfect pictures in low light.


-Paul

Well if we're approching it that way.... You can get action shots in a gym with the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 lens that are sharp and properly exposed if you know how. Like any lens, you only get as much as you put into it.

The shorter focal length primes that were mentioned by mom2rtk... a shorter length will make the lens a little faster and will give a little more depth of field, in addition to the wider shots.

 

[seashoreCM]

You can get action shots in a gym with the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 lens that are sharp and properly exposed if you know how. Like any lens, you only get as much as you put into it..

Can you fill me (us) in on some of this know-how?

For example does it require knowing when the subject is (will be) in a relatively still position such as at the peak of a jump?

Or does it require taking the shot when thje subject is moving towards or away from you as opposed to across the field of view?

Or does it require possessing post-processing software to bring out an image that was deliberately underexposed or to degrain an image whose ISO was really cranked to achieve a faster shutter speed?

Or are we talking about evaluating a sensor that can go to a higher ISO before objectionalble grain sets in, when buying another camera?

And does it require timing in the sense that if your camera has a lag between when you push the button and when it takes then you have to push the button just the right time in advance of the relatively still moment in the motion?

For two lenses with the same 35mm equivalent focal length and set to the same aperture the depth of field will be seen to be the same given an A/B comparison using finished pictures of the same subject enlarged to the same size. (The circle of confusion measured on each of those finished pictures will be the same diameter.)

 

[Groucho]

I have a Canon XS that I have had for a couple of months. Took it with me to WDW in October and was really happy with the pics I got with it, considering I only had a short time to use it beforehand and I only had the kit lens.

Now, we're starting basketball season and my pics are awful, which I expected with the kit lens. Really, really dark. I've been trying to read up on different lenses, but right now I don't want to shell out the big bucks for the perfect lens. We live in a small town, so I am always able to get front row seats so distance isn't an issue for me. It's just the darn lighting.

Would the 50mm f/1.8 lens help me at all?

Are the pictures awful because they are dark or awful because they are blurry or some other reason?

If the pictures are dark, that is an issue with exposure, not necessarily the lens. A faster lens like the 50mm F1.8 will not give you brighter photos, but it will let you get photos at the same brightness with a faster shutter speed.

 

[*pixie*]

Are the pictures awful because they are dark or awful because they are blurry or some other reason?

If the pictures are dark, that is an issue with exposure, not necessarily the lens. A faster lens like the 50mm F1.8 will not give you brighter photos, but it will let you get photos at the same brightness with a faster shutter speed.

I can get brighter photos, but I have to slow down the shutter speed, which results in blurred pics. If I use a faster shutter speed, then the pics get dark.

 

[pjacobi]

Well if we're approching it that way.... You can get action shots in a gym with the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 lens that are sharp and properly exposed if you know how. Like any lens, you only get as much as you put into it.

Yes, I totally agree! In the old days of film, this all had to be done at ASA/ISO 100 with manual exposure and manual focus. That means sitting on the foul line, watching the entire game from the viewfinder.

It takes lot of time and patience waiting for the moment when a player would be naturally frozen - at free throw, just before a pass, or at the foul line.

It takes EFFORT to get good shots, which is not something that can be done sitting in the stands chatting with other people.


-Paul

 

[handicap18]

What mode are you using for your shots?

Are you using aperture priority, shutter priority, Manual, or one of the pre loaded icon modes (ie: sports mode).

If your using the sports mode, you might be doing yourself a disservice. I would try shutter priority. Start with your highest ISO and use 1/200 for a shutter speed to start. Depending on the action you might be able to get a slower speed. When a player is at the foul line lining up his shot, use a slower speed to get more light. Try an get shots of the players waiting for a pass or playing defense.

Start easy. If your finding your getting plenty of light at your highest ISO, then you can do one of 2 things, lower your ISO or make your shutter faster and try for some more action shots.

If none of this works, then I would look into getting the 50mm f/1.8 lens. For the price you can't really beat it. Even with that lens for action I wouldn't jump right into the f/1.8 aperture. Start at f/4 and work your way wider till your comfortable with how the lens works.

With the right settings, though I think you should get some decent shots with just the kit lens.

I took these shots last season. A high school championship game at the TD Garden in Boston. Granted the lighting is a better considering this venue is a professional sports arena. A high school gym will vary in its lighting depending on how old it is and how serious the school is about their sports.

ISO800, 1/200th, f/4 at 95mm:

ISO800 1/200th, f/4 at 90mm:

 

[photo_chick]

Yes, I totally agree! In the old days of film, this all had to be done at ASA/ISO 100 with manual exposure and manual focus. That means sitting on the foul line, watching the entire game from the viewfinder.

It takes lot of time and patience waiting for the moment when a player would be naturally frozen - at free throw, just before a pass, or at the foul line.

It takes EFFORT to get good shots, which is not something that can be done sitting in the stands chatting with other people.


-Paul

Patience is something that is sorely lacking in today's digital world. I think with film we developed more patience because we had a limited number of shots. Film also forces us to put a lot more faith in our skills and rely a lot less on the camera.

 

[*pixie*]

What mode are you using for your shots?

Are you using aperture priority, shutter priority, Manual, or one of the pre loaded icon modes (ie: sports mode).

If your using the sports mode, you might be doing yourself a disservice. I would try shutter priority. Start with your highest ISO and use 1/200 for a shutter speed to start. Depending on the action you might be able to get a slower speed. When a player is at the foul line lining up his shot, use a slower speed to get more light. Try an get shots of the players waiting for a pass or playing defense.

Start easy. If your finding your getting plenty of light at your highest ISO, then you can do one of 2 things, lower your ISO or make your shutter faster and try for some more action shots.

If none of this works, then I would look into getting the 50mm f/1.8 lens. For the price you can't really beat it. Even with that lens for action I wouldn't jump right into the f/1.8 aperture. Start at f/4 and work your way wider till your comfortable with how the lens works.

With the right settings, though I think you should get some decent shots with just the kit lens.

I took these shots last season. A high school championship game at the TD Garden in Boston. Granted the lighting is a better considering this venue is a professional sports arena. A high school gym will vary in its lighting depending on how old it is and how serious the school is about their sports.

Thanks so much for the feedback and suggestions, and especially your example pics!

I haven't been using the sports mode, but instead using the manual or TV mode. Today I had it set at ISO 1600 and 1/125 to get good lighting. But, again, couldn't get very good action shots at that slow of speed. Maybe my expectations of getting a great shot of a player shooting the ball are too high?

I will probably go ahead and order that lens this week. Hopefully it helps!