[Marian Murdoch]

Lately, it seems as if my camera is having more and more problems focusing correctly. We have recently come into a little bit of money, and now is the perfect time for me to buy a new camera and glass. Since I live in the Pacific Northwest, most of what I do is under low light conditions, something my Minolta has always had a problem with. So what I'm asking you all is, can you tell me what kind of cameras you've had experience with and what your opinion is of their ability to focus in low light situations.

[jkleb]

From the Canon side of the equation, they all kinda...ummm...have issues in really low light. At least the Rebels, 20d and 40d that I have a lot of experience with. That being said I think people have a tendency to think camera's are supposed to see in the dark now a days. Modern lenses don't have good distance scales for manual focusing anymore so you have to rely on the auto focus if your shooting at or near wide open.

I think auto focus on any of the newer major camera brands is about the same. High ISO performance has some difference in them, and I think Nikon currently has the edge in image performance up there. In everything except some extreme applications I think it's a matter of which system you feel more comfortable with using as a whole package. No one thing stands out as a "have to have" feature.

[BobEdens]

sorry just noticing this.
My Nikons do really well in low light but not as good as the new Nikons.. [but six grand is a lot) The main trick to auto-focus in low light is getting enough light to the sensor. I carry a super bright LED flashlight (converted mag light) when I'm shooting in the dark with strobes. If I'm shooting with the f2.8 lens or the f1.8 it doesn't matter what the aperture is set to, the lens lets in more light.

I have shot with both the Sigma ex 70-200 f2.8 and the Nikkor 18-200 f3.5-5.6 both set at f8 in a slightly dim environment and the sigma focused faster. (I think its the speed of the lens not the brand)

[Travis Minnig]

Bob is correct, the lens probably makes the bigger difference.  It's because the lens doesn't stop down until you press the shutter, regardless of the aperture setting.  Therefore, a faster lens will always let in more light for both viewing and focusing.  The camera's sensor can only do so much, the maximum aperture of the lens is going to be the key.

[Marian Murdoch]

So, erm, I guess I should just buy whatever camera I think is best (still deciding on whether a Canon on Nikon will be the one) and spend the rest of the, er,  $10,000 on glass. *runs*

[BobEdens]

So, erm, I guess I should just buy whatever camera I think is best (still deciding on whether a Canon on Nikon will be the one) and spend the rest of the, er,  $10,000 on glass. *runs*

The high end cameras are all pretty close, pick the one that "fits" best.

Sigma makes mounts for Nikon and Canon, as long as you buy high (EX) they are all great.

50-500mm f/4-6.3  I have this lens and love it but it weighs nine pounds.
70-200mm f/2.8  I also have this lens and it is incredible in low light (but its hard to get far enough away when shooting portraits)
10 - 20mm f/3.5 (this one is on my dream list)
18 -250mm f/3.5 - 6.3 This is a bit slow for low light, but it will become the only lens you need except for specialty apps. (Wish I had bought this one instead of the NIkkor)
30mm f/1.4 EX  this one is also on my wish list
a 50mm f1.8 can be had for a couple hundred bucks and its worth it. Tack sharp, low light and about half what the f1.4 costs.

hope that helped at least a little.

example: stage lit by LEDs only. I shot this using f2.8 at 3600iso, 70mm at 1/80sec. Auto focus worked fine. I normally run a filter called Neat Image on everything shot at high iso.

[jkleb]

Don't count out Sony in your considerations. A great price on a full frames sensor body, in camera stabilization, and Ziess glass.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/a900-one-year.shtml

[Marian Murdoch]

Thanks, Bob! My 18-200mm lens is just about the only one I use now. I couldn't live without it, especially when traipsing around in the forest when you don't want to have to stop and change lenses in the middle of the trail.

John, I'm leery about Sony and wonder about their longevity as a company in the future. However, if I bought Sony, all my Minolta lenses would still work and I'd only have to buy a camera body and perhaps one really good lens for low light shooting.

Bob, I can't remember the last time I used a flash. *grin*

[Marian Murdoch]

I just read something that said my Minolta lenses won't be good for the a900 because they're not "full frame lenses".

Eh? What?

[Ryan]

Most dSLRs have a sensor that's smaller than a 35mm piece of film.  For example, a full frame is 1.6 times the area of a sensor on a Canon 20d.  It makes the lenses act a little longer.  Don't know about other brands, but Canon makes a series of lenses labeled EF-S that are meant specifically for the 1.6x lenses.  But if you stick an EF-S lens on a full frame camera, assuming you hack off a piece of plastic that would normally keep it from fitting, you wouldn't have a full image.  Of course you can go the other way without a hitch.  I have an EF-S camera, but all of my lenses are full frame.

[jkleb]

I wouldn't count on Sony going away anytime soon. They make the image sensors for Nikon and others, they teamed up with one of the absolute best lens companies in the world, and they have the photo background of Konica/Minolta in the fold with them. They may not be the powerhouses of Canon or Nikon anytime soon, but I think scare the bejezus out of them.

There's a few things I don't like about the Sony's, mainly their oddball hotshoe size, lack of fast glass, and a currently limited lens line-up. I see the last two problems changing in the next couple years. Why they can't get with the program on the hotshoe size with their Minolta holdover is beyond me. Sync cords are last line backup these days, and on camera flash just nukes things. People won't switch to a system just to save a couple hundred bucks on a camera body if they have to buy oddball radio triggers that may not be interchangeable with the other people they shoot with.

On the other hand, if your going to go with Canon might I suggest a used 5d if you can pry someone away from it, a 300 f2.8is with a 2x converter, 70-200 f2.8is, and a 24mm tilt-shift. Fill in the rest of the lens range to taste.

[BobEdens]

Don't your lens' fit your Minolta film camera? That would make them full frame. Unless they changed the mount they should work.

[Marian Murdoch]

Don't your lens' fit your Minolta film camera? That would make them full frame. Unless they changed the mount they should work.

I guess I'm still confused. My Minolta is a 1.6 (I think), so the lenses are built for that format (I think). Wouldn't putting those lenses on a full frame camera create vignetting? Or am I waaaaaaaaay off base and confused as can be?

[jkleb]

You're correct about the vignetting if the lens is built for a crop sensor body.

[Marian Murdoch]

You're correct about the vignetting if the lens is built for a crop sensor body.

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhh.