What are my options for an ƒ2.0 or faster lens of 100mm and over, if its unstabilized probably don't want to go over 200mm. i want it for decent quality low light night time urban fox shots. the low light difference between ƒ1.8 and ƒ1.4 is quite a big one so the faster the better AF would be nice but at the 100mm end i could go vintage manual if its faster than ƒ1.8 i have a Takumar 55mm ƒ1.8 but its not really got the reach and its out performed in low light by the ef-m 32mm even with the reach disadvantage the 32mm has as its a ƒ1.4 the sig 18-35mm Art, again a decent low light performer but lacking the reach and speed i'm looking for.
I have had a quick look on Pentax Forums as you have a M42 lens, and I can't find anything that fits what you are looking for. I have then had a look for EF lens, and I found a few. Canon EF 135mm f2 L Canon EF 200mm f2 L IS Carl Zeiss Mako-Planner T* 100mm f2 Carl Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 135 f2 Samyang 135mm f2 Sigma 105mm f1.4 Sigma 135mm f1.8 Venus Optics LAOWA 105mm f2 I am sure that there are others out there. Gary
of all of them i had already taken a close look at the sigma 105 and 135, they certainly hit the mark and it would be a chice between the 135 length over the 105 brighter aperture, price wise i'd be looking at around £700 if i got lucky for either of those two, definatly worth the asking prices of what i have been seeing around the £850+ but its a bit much at the moment, a question, what ƒ stop would a x2 converter drop an EF 85mm ƒ1.2 down to? i'd be using it on an M50 so i'm not sure if there is already a loss of ƒ when the lens goes through that adaption?
Seeking better glass for your camera is an advantage but the disadvantage is a high cost. Have you tried bumping up your ISO, the results from a modern camera, such as your M50 can yield very good images. My next suggestion is have you tried flash? The modern flash is wireless, so set the flash with a diffuser near-by and when the fox comes in to view. Like any animal it lives by set routines, regularly leave a little food out and it should develop a pattern of scavenging, one disadvantage are non targeted animals eating the baits you leave out.
F2.4 once you throw on a x2 converter. I am not so sure what the image quality will be like. But once you start chasing fast quality lenses, cheap falls out of the equation. What sort of iso are you shooting at to get an image of these fox's? And how grainy are the images? Gary
Haha, yeah i was taught young with lenses, Fast/Quality/Cheap you can only pick two. Works well for toys with wheels as well...
32mm ƒ1.4, ss 1/20, iso 800 so this is the fox that is pretty used to me so i can get much closer than any of the other foxes, from the full size images the 32mm is a bit on the wide side for foxes so i was thinking something like a 100mm fast might do better
this being my best fox picture, Taken with the sigma 18-35mm art, but this is again the same fox last year, easy to get very close to and the added bonus of much better lighting from my garage, Going out and about looking for other local foxes for the night time shoots i'm going to be a fair bit further away and probably lower light, neither of the lenses had IS so i can shoot handheld around 1/6 if the fox is dead still, probably not going to be freezing any action in low light at a distance as that would probably be looking at ss of 1/125 for a wandering fox and 1/500 for young ones so thats not really on the cards unless its in a really bright area.
I'm not going to use flash as i don't want to scare off the foxes, and one of the things i'm keen on is not disturbing them more than i need to, all images are jpegs, this is probably one of the areas of photography i'd probably benifit from shooting raw but don't have any raw software at the moment
I suggest for free software use Gimp2 and processing your raw files, may I suggest darktable "I personally have not used darktable but it is worth a look" for using raw files and Gimp2 , Check out youtube on how to do this. There are other free raw software available, just download the raw files and convert them to JPEGs and Gimp will do the rest. Gimp is nearly as good as photoshop. I have regularly used Gimp in the photo class I teach. Any problems we are here to help. Next if you are up to it financially try photoshop or beg borrow or steal a copy, like I had too, there are those of us on the forum that can help with that too.
tbh i'm happy with jpegs, i'm not selling any images or using them as a work thing, just for pleasure.
If you are content to use JPEGS that"s ok. the main thing with photography is you get out and about and enjoy what you are doing.
I think that I would be looking at one of the Sigma's. I know that it is more than what you want to spend. Also is it possible to use some sort of rest to place your setup on so that you can get away with a slower shutter speed?
sounds like you will be needing a tripod, I suggest a trip to a op shop or some place similar, might be the cheap way to go.
nope not going to be using a tripod, i do have them if i need, i also have a super light weight bean bag with that foam bean in it if i want. i'm ok hand holding un stabilized 1/20 and stabilized 1/6
i have tripods but i can take a bean bag with foam beans out, i been looking at the sigma 85mm ƒ1.4, art, it might have enough reach for what i want, might also be slightly better on weight. see what pops up on the SH market.
How about setting one of your slower lenses to roughly 85mm and take a few shots. Don't worry about the blurry or grainy images, just more of a test to see if a 85mm is going to cut it when it comes to focal length. Gary