Site Supporter
- Followers
- 21
- Following
- 1
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2021
- Posts
- 4,902
- Likes Received
- 3,789
- Name
- Tim
- Country
- United States
- City/State
- SE Michigan
Nearing the end of racing season and I need to rethink next year's kit for when it gets dark. The 2.8 lenses I've been using are ok but a faster lens would be helpful. This is from a previous post in another thread discussing high ISOs, rather than typing it all out again:
This Saturday may be my last trip to the track for the year. It's a small event and I'm just going to try some shots using faster primes. It's unlikely I'll be shooting at night for this test, it's more about checking DOF and where I need to locate myself along the wall with a fixed FL. Right now I have only two fast primes, a 35/1.4 and a 50/1.7. The 50 is an A-Mount, but I don't expect that to be a problem based on recent A to E experiences with the 7-IV and LE-EA5.
The 35 will probably be a go-to for this in the future, but I doubt the 50 is really a usable FL for this setting. I'm thinking the second prime would be something in the 85-135 range. Looking back at my photos 100mm shows up quite a bit in the EXIF. Unfortunately faster primes seem to be limited to the 85 and 135 FLs, except for Sigma's 105. That brings me to the next issue, cost.
As I've stated many times, I'm not a prime shooter. I am not a portrait photographer. Other than this specific use the lens isn't going to see much time out of the bag. Given that, spending thousands on it makes no sense to me. I need decent IQ and speed but don't care about smooth bokeh, size and weight, etc.
I've checked out a few options. Samyang makes an 85/1.8 that gets excellent reviews and can be had used for <$500. Another option may be the old Minolta Maxxum 100/2 for about the same cost, but I'd need to know how well it does on the adapter before I spent the $.
Neither of those offer more than a 1-1/3 stops though. While I normally don't fret over 1/3 or a 1/2 stop, it seems to be more critical in this application. I'd really rather get to /1.4 if possible. The whole problem is movement, if those damned cars would just do a wheel stand and SET STILL for a minute I'd be all set!
Another criteria is (probably) autofocus. I may try some zone focusing out there to see how well that works, but I'm afraid that with these shallow DOFs and a moving subject, that would be challenging at best and most likely result in too many failed shots. I'd be back to shooting the cars when they're static.
One other possibility is that the new owners will improve the abysmal lighting at the track next year. They made a lot of improvements and did many updates this season, but they had limited time to do as much as it needs. There is some hope the PA and lighting systems will be updated. If they do that, Then I wouldn't need to do anythign different, I could shoot what I have. But then...where's the fun in that?!!
What other suggestions for a lower cost lens with the specs given? Anyone have experience with that Minolta 100 on an adapter? What about some 1.4 lens options?
My main goal is to reduce ISO as much as possible, and maybe gain a stop in shutter speed. Shooting the 2.8 lenses has me in the 6400-8000 range, and I think maybe even 10,000 once in a while. The thing is there is no room there to even bump the shutter a tiny bit. If I can gain a stop or two it'd help a lot. ISO 8000 becomes 4000, and a 1/60 shutter becomes 1/125. Those two alone would be huge. Or if need be I shoot the slower shutter and get ISO to 2000 or even 1600.The biggest problem is the type of photography. Almost everything I shoot is in motion with the desire to freeze it in place, which is not always possible when it gets dark. It's a balancing act between DOF, SS and ISO (well, isn't it always?) but with far more limitations at night.
I like to try and keep as much of the car in focus as I can, so my aperture is going to remain more closed than open. Trying to overexpose or ETTR is useless since I'm either trying to freeze or my shutter is already pushing the window for handheld. That leaves ISO. Many times I'll simply take static shots instead.
Up until now I've been shooting longer zooms at night like I do during the day. I need to rethink this, and believe part of my answer is to shoot a shorter FL from nearer, which will improve the DOF and allow slower shutters due to the FL. Of course it's not going to help in freezing motion, but I'll be in a position to pan standing next to the vehicle with a short lens. This may allow a bit of overexposure, even 1/3 stop would be welcomed.
Most of the night shots I've taken at the track so far have been 6400 or 8000, which seem to clean up pretty well, some better than others.
This Saturday may be my last trip to the track for the year. It's a small event and I'm just going to try some shots using faster primes. It's unlikely I'll be shooting at night for this test, it's more about checking DOF and where I need to locate myself along the wall with a fixed FL. Right now I have only two fast primes, a 35/1.4 and a 50/1.7. The 50 is an A-Mount, but I don't expect that to be a problem based on recent A to E experiences with the 7-IV and LE-EA5.
The 35 will probably be a go-to for this in the future, but I doubt the 50 is really a usable FL for this setting. I'm thinking the second prime would be something in the 85-135 range. Looking back at my photos 100mm shows up quite a bit in the EXIF. Unfortunately faster primes seem to be limited to the 85 and 135 FLs, except for Sigma's 105. That brings me to the next issue, cost.
As I've stated many times, I'm not a prime shooter. I am not a portrait photographer. Other than this specific use the lens isn't going to see much time out of the bag. Given that, spending thousands on it makes no sense to me. I need decent IQ and speed but don't care about smooth bokeh, size and weight, etc.
I've checked out a few options. Samyang makes an 85/1.8 that gets excellent reviews and can be had used for <$500. Another option may be the old Minolta Maxxum 100/2 for about the same cost, but I'd need to know how well it does on the adapter before I spent the $.
Neither of those offer more than a 1-1/3 stops though. While I normally don't fret over 1/3 or a 1/2 stop, it seems to be more critical in this application. I'd really rather get to /1.4 if possible. The whole problem is movement, if those damned cars would just do a wheel stand and SET STILL for a minute I'd be all set!
Another criteria is (probably) autofocus. I may try some zone focusing out there to see how well that works, but I'm afraid that with these shallow DOFs and a moving subject, that would be challenging at best and most likely result in too many failed shots. I'd be back to shooting the cars when they're static.
One other possibility is that the new owners will improve the abysmal lighting at the track next year. They made a lot of improvements and did many updates this season, but they had limited time to do as much as it needs. There is some hope the PA and lighting systems will be updated. If they do that, Then I wouldn't need to do anythign different, I could shoot what I have. But then...where's the fun in that?!!
What other suggestions for a lower cost lens with the specs given? Anyone have experience with that Minolta 100 on an adapter? What about some 1.4 lens options?