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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 23, 2005, 6:04 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 236
Default

Just curious. I'm shooting a Roller Derby in indoor poor lighting and my 3 lens are 3.5 with the 50mm f1.8.

Lighing is a problem here - I have an SB600 but . . .
Grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 24, 2005, 10:08 AM   #2
Junior Member
 
Khaled J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 10
Default

One of the strengths of Nikon digital cameras is that satisfactory results can be obtained indoors under various types of illumination without using a flash.


However, you must still use the flash to freeze a quickly moving subject. As always, local conditions must be taken into consideration, but generally the background will be slightly affected by the color of thearea lighting, since the auto-white balance feature will reference the subject illuminated by the flash. The closer the flash is to the subject, the less exposed the background will be. If the background is immediately behind the subject and within the effective range of the flash, there should be no problem. Now, fo the lens my advice is to go for the new Sigma 55-200mm f4-5.6 DC. It has 9 elements in 10 groups and you can buy it for less than 150$.

Regards,

Khaled J.

NIKON 4 EVER
Khaled J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2005, 12:10 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 236
Default

I have a Nikkoe 70-300 4/5.6 which I probebly won't use. the 18-70 3.5 is the lens of choice at the momwent.

From what I have seen on the web of other all female Roller Derby events lighting is an issue and not many good shots out there. I think I'll go with my SB600 rear curtain mode and pray. At least I'll have one practice session befor the match.
Grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2005, 1:50 PM   #4
Member
 
bigconig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 79
Default

The 35-70 2.8 is a good deal used. I got one on ebay for $200. Very sharp but a little limited in zoom range. An 85 1.8 is a real nice fast lens. 80-200 2.8 is a bit more pricey but also an amazing lens.
bigconig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2005, 2:36 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 269
Default

Since the definition of "inexpensive" can change from person to person, what is your definition? You can get an 85 1.8 for about $350 new, don't know if you would consider that inexpensive or not. If the lighting is really bad even the 1.8 may not help, in which case the 18-70 may indeed be best with the flash.
murphyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2005, 11:03 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 236
Default

Inexpensive less then $500 and $9 if possable LOL. I just look at fast Nikkor's and see $3,000 and go . . .what else LOL.

a 100 3.5 and a 85 1.8 is not THAT different right - about 1 stop and if light is bad at 3.5 it will still be bad at 1.8.

I have a SB600 and now wish I had a SB800. Little did I know I would need more power so soon! I would buy a SB800 but how many times will I need 2 speedligts!
Grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2005, 12:36 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 269
Default

Grinder wrote:
Quote:
Inexpensive less then $500 and $9 if possable LOL. I just look at fast Nikkor's and see $3,000 and go . . .what else LOL.

a 100 3.5 and a 85 1.8 is not THAT different right - about 1 stop and if light is bad at 3.5 it will still be bad at 1.8.

I have a SB600 and now wish I had a SB800. Little did I know I would need more power so soon! I would buy a SB800 but how many times will I need 2 speedligts!
If good lenses went for $9 MANY people would be extremely happy! :G
I think there is a pretty big difference between 3.5 and 1.8. I'll leave the technical differences (i.e. just how many stops that is, I know it's more than 1 stop) to someone else. I would disagree that bad lighting at 3.5 would still be bad at 1.8. The reason for getting 2.8 or 1.8 lenses is for just that type of lighting situation. I've tried shooting games in some gyms with my 80-200 2.8 lens and found lighting too low; a switch to my 85 1.8 lens worked great. Couple of games ago the paper's photographer had her 18-35 2.8 lens with flash and asked to borrow my 85 1.8 lens. She got hooked, next game I felt like a drug dealer by dangling the 85 in front of her. She snatched it out of my hand. :lol:
As for the flash, I've seen some people talk highly of their Sigma flashes, I believe the 500 Super or something like that falls between Nikon's SB600 and SB800.
murphyc 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 5:50 AM.