looking for a better low light lens-wedding

C

cuprajake

Messages
247
Edit My Images
Yes
hey guy's

recently went on my jollies and mainly used my nikon 18-55vr lens, now i found the range really good, but when i went to the dali musem, i found myself needing to mess with either iso and not getting brilliant pics, now this lens goes to 3.5-5.6, i have been asked to shoot my sisters wedding and now am worried that i may get poor inside pics, so have been looking at a lower f-stop lens.

i have found this:

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM Zoom

it has the stability like the vr lens, but goes lower, i fo have a nifty fifty but if im hand holding i get shake so need the vr,

what would people reccomend or suggest for me

cheers in advance

jake
 
If you are looking for a f2.8 I think you'd be better off with a constant f2.8 like the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. These (and others) offer f2.8 throughout the zoom range rather than just at the wide end.
 
I made the switch from the fabulous Tammy 17-50 (mk2, non-VC model) to the Nikon 17-55 and have to say it's been worthwhile.

The Tamron was excellent, although it replaced the also-excellent Nikon 18-70mm (need constant f/2.8), and just worked flawlessly each and every time it got used.

The Nikon is the best of the bunch, no question, but it's a best and comes under scrutiny more because you pay a big premium for it over the 3rd-party offerings. Personally, I bought a used version for £600 and thought that good value; I'd probably pay the full RRP if I was more flush, but when you do compare it against the others on offer that near-£1000 price tag can sting a little. Build quality is where it excels over the competition and weathersealing.

IMO, faster lenses are a godsend, if only to expand creativity through shallower DoF, but I'd say that if you're really struggling with low light then a camera capable of shooting at extremely high ISOs (6400 and upwards) is ultimately going to offer more versatility than a lens that has a 1-2 stop advantage over your current glass.....
 
Last edited:
i have only just upgraded to the d80 from a d40, i have a 18-55 vr and a 50-200vr both nikon, so may look at the fixed lenses
 
im on a budget though, so the tameron fits the bill better lol, i have noticed though canon fit lenses are cheaper than nikon haha

the tameron is around £200-£300 though
 
cuprajake said:
im on a budget though, so the tameron fits the bill better lol, i have noticed though canon fit lenses are cheaper than nikon haha

the tameron is around £200-£300 though
Click to expand...

In many cases the Canons are cheaper, or can just be that there are some Canon lenses that Nikon doesn't make an equivalent of (i.e. 70-200mm f/4). I just accepted it as part of owning a camera system that fitted me better....

I got my Tamron for £160 off ebay and it was a corker - about 6-months old if I remember rightly. I think the going rate for the Mk2 on the used market is about £160-190 for good/mint ones. You'd struggle to find a Nikon one for less than £500 and then it'll be a bit rough probably.

The Tamron is probably the benchmark for 3rd party fast zooms at the moment so a good choice if you opt for it :)
 
well the wedding is sept so gives me time to look haha, i notice there are vc and non vc, i know i will need the vc so need to becarful with ebay discriptions as they can be sneaky thanks again for the input
 
cuprajake said:
well the wedding is sept so gives me time to look haha, i notice there are vc and non vc, i know i will need the vc so need to becarful with ebay discriptions as they can be sneaky thanks again for the input
Click to expand...

Problem being the non-VC version is the much better lens...
 
yeah had read that, but with it being hand held is it worth the risk?
 
so far, have found

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro Nikon £250
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II VC IF motor Lens - NIKON £300
NIKON FIT SIGMA 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO £249

17-35mm f/2.8-4 D Sigma EX DG HSM zoom lens, Nikon AF D £200

brain is fried haha
 
Depending on the venue you may find that even f2.8 isn't fast enough. In a dimly lit Church where flash isn't allowed you'll need a high iso and something like a f1.4 lens.
 
The possible problem with the variable aperture lenses is... well... the aperture changes :D

so the sigma 17-70 will do f2.8 at 17mm but at some stage between 17 and 70mm it changes to f4 (probably in 1/3rd stop steps), same idea with the 17-35.

Its a bit unfortunate the way this works as you'd really want more light at the long end where shutter speed matters more to avoid camera shake. An annoying thing with these in my camera is if i am in Av mode and i set the aperture to f2.8 and then zoom in it'll automatically change to f3.5 or something then i zoom back out, it stays at f3.5 :S

Constant aperture zooms for me in the future!
 
venue is a local town hall, i do have the 50mm 1.8 but i know i will get shake ummmm choices

so we still think the tameron 17-50 is best
 
not yet, i was thinking of getting a flash, but mite not be best etiqute for a wedding
 
If you're THE photographer and it's "only" a village hall (don't mean to belittle the wedding but a village hall is not likely to have any rules on these things) then flash would usually be fine and bounced flash would be far more beneficial than a faster lens, assuming the ceilings are low enough.

A 2.8 VC lens isn't really going to give you much benefit over a 1.8 lens as you'll still need to keep the shutter speed high enough so as you don't get motion blur from the subjects and the 1.8 lens is better at that.
 
cuprajake said:
venue is a local town hall, i do have the 50mm 1.8 but i know i will get shake ummmm choices

so we still think the tameron 17-50 is best
Click to expand...

Can you get access to the venue before the event? That would allow you to take some light readings and see what shutter speed, aperture/ISO you'll need and this may affect your decision.

Although you've "upgraded" from the D40 to D80 you'll find the D80 handles ISOs above 800 worse than the D40 did and this doesn't help you.

Good luck with the gig :)
 
facepalm haha,

need to go have a look round see whats what cheers for all the opinions, like you say no point in spending if there is no abvantage
 
Do your homework and see what is (and isn't) allowed during the service.

I recently shot one at a very posh stately home and was fully expecting it to be no-flash... the registrar's assistant talked to me and said it was fine to shoot with flash before the service, as the bride was coming down the aisle, as they kissed and thereafter. Helped me no-end, despite the ceilings being a good 30ft up so bounce lost me a lot of power but it was better than a poke in the eye with a dog pooh :)

I ended up shooting at a base ISO of 800, moving to 1600 (hi1) for the majority once the sun went in outside and left indoors very dim indeed. Noise reduction in LR3 comes in very handy if it comes to shooting that high (or buy a D3s) :)
 
think this is the main thing with such a varied hobbie lol, for every question, there are 10 different correct answers, even a decent flash can be the same price as a 2.8 lens haha,

i may ring the place tomorrow to see.
 
If you're wanting to keep your costs down and get good results then I'd go with flash, get something like a few Yong-nuo YN460-II's, the RF-602 wireless triggers, some light stands and cheap umbrellas and learn how to do the strobist thing. Should be able to do that for under £250 at a guess.
 
not that practical for a wedding though, think the lens is a better option for me,
 
Have you thought about hiring a lens (maybe a better body too) to keep the cost down?
 
i did think that yes,

as for body what would be a good upgrade for me
 
For high iso's? Ultimately a D3 if you intend to continue with Weddings without flash. A lower cost interim body - I'd say the D90, it has much better noise handling at high iso than the D80.
 
UMM, the wedding is deffo a one off haha, unless im ground breakingly good haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top