Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 24, 2009, 8:13 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Boldstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 241
Default

sawatzky wrote:
Quote:
50mm x 1.6 = the equivalent of an 80 mm lens on a film or full-frame digital camera. 80mm is very tight with my old film camera.

Because sensor sizes are all over the map, manufacturers still use full 36mm film sizes as the references for focal length. EVEN if the lens is made specifically for 1.6 crop factor cameras.

So... either your buddy's camera was full frame sensor (or film) OR the room you were in was larger than average....
Aside from the fact that I have close to no idea what you're talking about... I actually tried my buddy's 1.8 lens on my camera. And the room we were shooting in is relatively small. In fact, I tested out a co-workers 50mm prime on his D60 in the office today and I got the same impression... not very close at all. In fact, looking through the viewfinder, it's nearly the same as looking at your subject with the naked eye.


Boldstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2009, 9:41 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3
Default

Well I can't argue with impressions. But I know that on a D60, that 50mm lens is the equivalent of an 80mm lens on a full frame camera. If you put that same lens on a film camera (or 1D or 5D ) you would see what I mean. THAT would look "normal".
sawatzky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2009, 10:10 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Boldstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 241
Default

Bear in mind that you're trading posts with a hobbyist. So I don't know the difference between a full-frame, half-frame and beer-frame camera. Maybe I'll look back on this thread a year from now and laugh at my ignorance, but for now this techie stuff escapes me.

I'm using a Canon XSi. Is that a full-frame camera? I have no *&$!&^% idea. All I know is that I've looked through the viewfinder with one eye while keeping my eye on the subject with the other eye, and it's nearly identical. (Holding the camera lengthwise, of course. I'm not an Alien Invader.)

Back to the whole point of this thread... I wonder if the 50mm 1.4 USM lens will aid in my quest to take no-flash pictures of people and my mutt in low-light, indoor scenarios.


Boldstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2009, 12:45 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 385
Default

Quote:
Back to the whole point of this thread... I wonder if the 50mm 1.4 USM lens will aid in my quest to take no-flash pictures of people and my mutt in low-light, indoor scenarios.
I feel confident that - Yes it will go a long way in helping in low light in-door situations, much more so than the kit lens.

Like you, I also have the XSi and it is a 1.6 crop camera like sawatzky referenced. You mentioned using a similar lens before and if you are only shooting one or two people it would not seem too close and works very well. I just mentioned about the smaller range as it does come into play for a wider shot like the group picture I had above. Just something to be aware of.

I think either of the lenses, 1.4 or 1.8 should work.

Good luck,
Andy
griffina6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2009, 10:44 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Boldstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 241
Default

Griff... How do you manage shots like that basketball example? On a tripod? I took a bunch of photos of my dog today at an indoor training thing and they came out terrible. Granted, I wasn't using a 50mm prime...

I tried my best to do without flash, and I tried a variety of settings... open apature, fast shutter speed, higher ISO. So many of them came out blurry. Yes, she's a quick moving dog... Perhaps the handheld strategy isn't working for me.


Boldstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2009, 8:37 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
polarwasp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 167
Default

Auto-focus problem? I do struggle with that all the time... last time I try to shoot some touch rugby, I had the focus on the wrong player most of the time... Still learning :?
polarwasp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2009, 9:15 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Boldstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 241
Default

polarwasp wrote:
Quote:
Auto-focus problem? I do struggle with that all the time... last time I try to shoot some touch rugby, I had the focus on the wrong player most of the time... Still learning :?
No, I don't think it's a focus problem. I've got my auto-focus set to the centre point, so I'm the once choosing my subject, not the camera. I think I needed a faster shutter speed, but holding the camera in my hands it was difficult to stay still.

Maybe a better lens would have helped too...
Boldstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2009, 11:37 AM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Boldstar wrote:
Quote:
I took a bunch of photos of my dog today at an indoor training thing and they came out terrible. Granted, I wasn't using a 50mm prime...

I tried my best to do without flash, and I tried a variety of settings... open apature, fast shutter speed, higher ISO. So many of them came out blurry. Yes, she's a quick moving dog... Perhaps the handheld strategy isn't working for me.

It's all about light levels and what exposure values you have available. First, the gym the basketball takes place in my be better lit than the indoor training area your dog was in. But even a well lit gym will require f1.8 ISO 1600 to get 1/500 shutter speeds. If you don't have a lens capable of f1.8 or f2.0 then you're not going to get fast enough shutter speeds - especially with only ISO 1600.

If you're using the kit lens - it's f5.6. So if your lighting was the same as the gym the basketball was in (and I'm guessing the lighting wasn't as good) that would mean at ISO 1600, F5.6 you would have shutter speeds of 1/50 - no where near good enough. F1.8 is 3 1/3 stops better than 5.6 and that's a big difference.

But you're going to have a LOT of difficulty getting dog agility shots indoors with a 50mm lens. A 50mm lens is going to have accurate focus/sharpness out to about 15 feet and that's it. Beyond that range your focus / sharpness will decrease rapidly. It's tough to be that close to the action. And when you ARE that close, the dof is quite shallow. The 50mm 1.4 is not a fast focusing lens so it's going to take a lot of practice with a dog to get some good results.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2009, 11:30 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 385
Default

Quote:
No, I don't think it's a focus problem. I've got my auto-focus set to the centre point, so I'm the once choosing my subject, not the camera. I think I needed a faster shutter speed, but holding the camera in my hands it was difficult to stay still.
No I haven't tried the tripod yet but I will soon with soccer. I have switched to portrait mode shots almost 100% for basketball trying to get feet to head shots when possible. I just hold the grip in my right hand above eye level and let the camera hang down with just a little support from left hand. I find it easier to steady that way than landscape.

Right under the basket (trying to get faces) the only fast lenses I had were the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 so I struggle with the framing being so close and the 50 is easier to frame but like John said it is not as fast focusing.

What I've found is that center spot must be right on the subject (I my case player) for some time before/during shutter release otherwise I end up having the bench or fans in focus and a blurry player.

It's got to be tough to get a shot with the dog in focus. If I was there I.m sure I would try the 85 as it gives more reach and is much easier (at least for me) to focus.

I have never tried dog photography but if they are in a small enough area you could try manual focus and pre-focus on a spot the same distance as many of the tricks or moves and try snapping the shots as the dogs pass by at that approximate distance.

When I first ordered the XSi w/kit lens I also got a Sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3. I could not understand the ads for "body only" - sounded crazy to me. But now I see and the next camera I get probably will be "body only". It really takes a nice lens to get the shots you want in these low light situations.

griffina6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2009, 8:36 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Boldstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 241
Default

Thank you both for the feedback.

Yes, my kit lens is limited to f5.6 unless I'm using a very wide angle, in which case it goes as low as f3.5. But obviously wide angles are no good for what I was trying to shoot.

John, do you have a suggestion re good lens for dog agility stuff? Or even something that'd be good for capturing her jumping for frisbees in the park?
Boldstar is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15 PM.