70-200mm f/4 IS in Low Light

R

Ren Tachino

Active member
Does anyone have any experience with the EF 70-200mm f/4 IS in low light for video? Is f/4 aperture in general good enough for dimly lit indoor wedding receptions? My Tamron's f/2.8 does fine indoors, but I want to know how the 70-200mm F/4 fair. Any ideas or experiences?
 
Thanks. I actually have stopped it down, and it doesn't lose THAT much light, but I wanted someone with first hand experience shooting with this lens. Ideally I would get the f/2.8 IS, but it ain't in the budget...yet!
 
F4 is always going to be a problem in low light - there is no getting around that. Once you move to the longer focal lengths then (lack of working) DOF can become a real issue too. I have the 2.8L IS and really it depends on what you are calling low light. Inside (house, church, hotel etc) you will need to be using very high ISO (2500, 5000 etc) to get anything reasonable, so plan on using Neat Video to smooth out some of the noise.
 
Exact said:
F4 is always going to be a problem in low light - there is no getting around that. Once you move to the longer focal lengths then (lack of working) DOF can become a real issue too. I have the 2.8L IS and really it depends on what you are calling low light. Inside (house, church, hotel etc) you will need to be using very high ISO (2500, 5000 etc) to get anything reasonable, so plan on using Neat Video to smooth out some of the noise.
Click to expand...

Thanks. But that was what I was afraid of. I need a good telephoto for weddings and other events, but the f/2.8 IS isn't in the budget and I don't want to buy one without image stabilization. Perhaps I'll just buy the f/4 IS for now until I CAN afford the f/2.8 as the f/4 will probably hold its value pretty well.
 
For an indoor wedding reception where you won't have the ability to light, f/4 is going to be way too slow. Slow lenses & indoor wedding photography/videography do not mix. You want f/2.8 or faster - and I'll second the recommendation on the 85mm f/1.4 by Samyang - your issue is going to be pulling focus on it as the DOF at that focal length is pretty shallow.
 
I would buy the regular 70-200 2.8 without IS, and use a tripod or that unique manfrotto monopod. It is sensitive to small vibrations especially on the dance floor, but so far I've been fine w/o IS.
 
Or just rent the lens each time you do a wedding and include it with your costs. You can rent that lens for less than $100 with insurance. Maybe something you did not want to hear but if it's going to land you the job it's worth it. So if your making $1000 or even $800 to shoot the wedding minus $100 for the fee of lens rental is not so bad.


Now if your not making that kind of money then this conversation and thread should not even exist, cause if your only getting like $500 then just shoot with the kit lens and high iso until you can afford something better :thumbup:
 
Ren Tachino said:
Thanks. But that was what I was afraid of. I need a good telephoto for weddings and other events, but the f/2.8 IS isn't in the budget and I don't want to buy one without image stabilization. Perhaps I'll just buy the f/4 IS for now until I CAN afford the f/2.8 as the f/4 will probably hold its value pretty well.
Click to expand...

Hopefully you aren't thinking of hand holding this for video! I would take the non-IS 2.8 version on a tripod over the F4 version every time. Once on a tripod you will turn the IS off anyway...
 
Wow, thanks for all the replies. Yes, I do make a decent amount of money when I do the weddings. At least, when I do them through my own company. I just did some work for another company and they really don't pay their shooters much. :( My plans were to rent the 70-200 f/2.8 whenever I have a shoot, then hopefully make enough profit to fund my own. But as I currently have the funds for an f/4, I was wondering if I should just pull the trigger. Looks like the general consensus, however, is that f/4 is far too slow. Looks like I won't be getting my own for a while then.

And actually I find that IS does work fine on a tripod, especially when you have to adjust shots, it makes it much more smooth than it would be without the IS. I don't have the best tripod head, so the IS helps with the jerkiness the tripod head would produce.
 
So, two things:

Do you have the Tamron 70-200 F/2.8? is that the tamron you are talking about in the begining?

Also, a good tripod is one of the best things you can get...... even more important than lenses...
At least to me...
 
My apologies, I thought I put it. It's actually the Tamron 17-55 VC. To be honest, tripods during weddings are a bit too clunky for me. I prefer monopods. The tripod, however, would be for the wide shot, where I would also want the 70-200
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top