Good digital camera for low light conditions

I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless photography
in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and forests.

I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
cameras that are very good with low light.

Any ideas would be appreciated.
--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidance -- Brazil


pakrat@localhost.private.neotoma.org

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) rg:

> I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless
> photography in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and
> forests.
>
> I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
> cameras that are very good with low light.
>
> Any ideas would be appreciated.

Any of the big pixel DSLRs. Pentax *ist Ds is about the cheapest of those
which go up to ISO3200 and its also the smallest and lightest but if you
don't need ISO3200, then the EOS 300D is the cheapest and most widely
available. D70, 10D, *ist D are the next price rung up with the EOS 20D,
Dynax 7D perched on top of that. I assume, since you're mentionning pro-
sumer gear such as P&S and ZLR that you can't afford an EOS 1D Mark II,
which is certainly the class leader. The smaller pixel DSLRs - both of
Olympus's, any of Sigma's - aren't as good at low light work. Having got
one, then a 50mm f1.4 lens is your next port of call with an 85mm f1.4 lens
close behind (vying with a 70-200 f2.8, I expect).

--Sophie

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:03:28 GMT, (E-Mail Removed)
wrote:

>I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless photography
>in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and forests.
>
>I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
>cameras that are very good with low light.

Canon EOS 1DMark2 comes to mind

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:58:43 GMT in <(E-Mail Removed)> YAG-ART <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:03:28 GMT, (E-Mail Removed)
> wrote:
>
>>I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless photography
>>in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and forests.
>>
>>I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
>>cameras that are very good with low light.
>
> Canon EOS 1DMark2 comes to mind

Outside of my price range.

Of the ideas mentioned by Sophie, the EOS 300D most closely matches what
I can afford on the short term. The Pentax *ist DS and Canon EOS 20D
would have me waiting until the next generation of DSLRs is out.

So, of those does anyone have experience with them with dim lighting
conditions and something as fast as a horse at a trot? Or taking
photos of wildlife at dusk?
--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidance -- Brazil

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) rg:

> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:58:43 GMT in
> <(E-Mail Removed)> YAG-ART <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:03:28 GMT,
>> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>
>>>I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless
>>>photography in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows,
>>>and forests.
>>>
>>>I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
>>>cameras that are very good with low light.
>>
>> Canon EOS 1DMark2 comes to mind
>
> Outside of my price range.

Well, yes. And I think you'd find it a smidgen heavy, too...

> Of the ideas mentioned by Sophie, the EOS 300D most closely matches
> what I can afford on the short term. The Pentax *ist DS and Canon EOS
> 20D would have me waiting until the next generation of DSLRs is out.

*ist DS is as cheap as the 300D in the UK. And my friend Emma's 20D
should have been delivered yesterday (I'm taking the lack of email as
positive confirmation that she's spending every waking minute with
it...).

> So, of those does anyone have experience with them with dim lighting
> conditions and something as fast as a horse at a trot? Or taking
> photos of wildlife at dusk?

I could ask my dad - he's got a 300D. My experience with the *ist D (the
*ist DS's bigger brother) is that it is literally incredible (spooky!)
what it can do in dim light - with the right lens. You should get similar
performance from the 300D up to ISO1600, but if you're desperate for
speed, it doesn't have ISO3200 which the *ist DS does. You can buy image
stabilised lenses for the Canon, but clearly those have no shutter speed
advantage and aren't going to help with a moving horse: you will need the
fastest lenses you can get instead. A 50 at f1.4 or f1.2 and an 85 at
f1.4 are available and you will get results as good as can be got. If you
have difficulty framing the shot, then a 70-200 f2.8 is about the best
option I can think of! (If you want a tripod, then get one upon which you
can mount a Manfrotto grip head - 222 or 322.)

Traditionally, at this point, I'm supposed to point you to pictures of a
horse shot with an f1.4 lens in low light. But I don't do horses in low
light - I can point you to a wedding in low light instead!

--Sophie

(Yes, I know - it seems like everyone has a DSLR. I live in a strange
world in that I even know someone else with a Pentax *ist D (i.e. not via
the internet), but appearances to the contrary, not everyone has one yet.
But for low light, they're probably obligatory.)

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:03:28 GMT, (E-Mail Removed)
wrote:

>I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless photography
>in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and forests.
>
>I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
>cameras that are very good with low light.
>
>Any ideas would be appreciated.

I have just answered these questions for myself recently. My answer
included a canon d20. Since that's not an option; my 2nd choice was
the 300d - cost less and has alot of the same features. You will need
to have a full pocket to buy len's for whatever you get. The lens,
imo,is at least as salient (probably more so ) in terms of dictacting
what you will and won't be able to do. You will spend more for a
good telephoto, than you will for the rebel (which btw you can
get a firmware hack to open some of the functionality i'm told).

And do you wan't wide angle shots? The glass is more important
it seems than the particular "flavor" of dslr ...all things being
remotely equal.

I had a sony f707..and it was pretty nice for what it was. So is the
newer f717 or 828...Very nice point and shoot. They will do what you
want i imagine ..though to a limited degree. But..what they are - is
all they ever will be. You want an SLR..because of the INTERCHANGEABLE
LENS....so that's where the action is. --so find out what you can
afford vis - lens..and what you "will" be able to afford - vis lenses
and accessories, and then look over your shoulder at what cam
is keeping up with you. I chose the 20d because there was alot
of fine points i could use now...and down the road. Either that or
maybe a used 10d..(fine cam i'm told). Also the Nikon d70 has just
been proclaimed by some as cam of the year. That's a slightly
different ball of eels. If my memory serves me well..you can get
a little better deal on some nikor lens's...dunnoh though 'cause went
for a canon.

You need to put an entire package together for yourself and have some
vision of where you're headed and have a little patience to complete
your ensemble.

I hope this answer is not too philosophical and lacking in actual
lens ref's like some of the other fine answers you gotten.

Good Luck and Enjoy.

Ken

Kibo informs me that (E-Mail Removed) stated that:

>So, of those does anyone have experience with them with dim lighting
>conditions and something as fast as a horse at a trot? Or taking
>photos of wildlife at dusk?

Neither of those are a practical proposition with low-priced DSLRs. You
*might* be able to get usable images with a high end DSLR (such as the
Canon 1DmkII), equipped with F1.2 or 1.4 prime lenses.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) rg:

> I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless
> photography in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and
> forests.
>
> I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
> cameras that are very good with low light.
>
> Any ideas would be appreciated.

Canon 20D, Canon 70-200 f2.8L (preferably the IS model), Canon 580EX
speedlite for when it doesn't need to be flashless.

Unfortunately the cost is high for the good lenses (dearer than the
camera).

On a budget there is the Canon 300D and the 50 f1.8 and the 85 f1.8. You
do need to pay attention to the max lens aperture, a lens with f5.6 is not
going to do so well in low light. F5.6 requires a shutter speed 4x as long
as f2.8 and over 8 times as long as f1.8.




--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 12-Nov-04)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

Maybe it's not just the camera. If you need to use a long focal length the
bigger investment needed is a low F-stop lens.

-Michael

You need Very Fast Lenses and really good sensors for low light
photography.

You will either need to invest several thousand dollars for lens and
body, or save a thousand and start with film and very fast lenses.

But point and shoot lenses of any type just do not put enough light on
the sensor to do well in low light.



(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> I'm looking for ideas on a digital camera suitable for flashless photography
> in low light conditions such as concerts, horse shows, and forests.
>
> I'm looking for compact, but I haven't seen any point 'n shoot or ZLR
> cameras that are very good with low light.
>
> Any ideas would be appreciated.