Best lens for Low light scene outside with only a light pole light source???

A lot will depend on the camera, if it's 4/3 mount look at the Voigtlaender Nokton f0.95 lenses, there are 2, the 17.5 & 25mm, I think they are about the fastest lenses around, otherwise there are the Nikon f1.2 50, 55, 58 & 85mm, you'll have to hunt for these and they still command a good $ on the second hand market. There may be other fast lenses for other manufacturers but these are what I am familiar with.
 
Any fast lens, sharp at f2 or less will do fine. 35 and 50mm lenses tend to be the cheapest, fastest and the sharpest wide open. It has long been the standard kit lens so they are well engineered and the least complex, approximating human vision. It is the camera's sensor that will play the larger role in low light sensitivity. With a single light source from high overhead your placement of the actors and the direction they face is going to be even more important than the camera/lens. If they are right underneath it, the tops of their head, nose and ears will be lit and everything else in high contrast shadow. If they are in front of the light you'll get cool backlit silhouettes but no detail. Spend some time blocking your actors movements so you have them in place for the right lighting at key moments. A reflector may help to lower the contrast and get some detail in the closeups.
 
Spend the money on more lights. The only way you're going to get decent exposure with hardly any light is with a stupid f stop.
 
The other thing you're going to have to worry about is the CRI (color rendering index) of the light. If your main light source is a street lamp or something similar, it will probably not give you very good color rendition on your subjects, thus giving you very poor skin tone and overall rendition of colors. You may be able to correct for some of this in post with the grade, but either way it's just something to keep in mind. Basically any fast lens will do you justice as long as it's fast and at least somewhat sharp. I've had fast, old lenses that have turned out really foggy images, so it's just something to watch out for.
 
sonofaresiii said:
Lenses can't light scenes.
Click to expand...

How droll. The fact of the matter is, the OP may not have the money, resources, or permits necessary to shoot in this location with the appropriate lighting. Yes, it'd be ideal to get some really good lights and do it properly, but the thing is at this level we often have to get the fastest lens possible and shoot with available light. Very rarely are we able to shoot in ideal circumstances, and so indie filmmaking often becomes about finding the best jerry-rigged solution.
 
There are many things we can suggest but you should really take the time and test/scout this location yourself to find out what you need.
Go out there with a light meter and find out what you might need.
If you don't have your light meter go out with your camera. If your lens is indeed too slow start dropping your shutter speed or raising the iso and figure out how much more speed you would need.
If you are renting a camera I'd suggest renting it a day early and doing this test.
 
tommygdawg said:
How droll. The fact of the matter is, the OP may not have the money, resources, or permits necessary to shoot in this location with the appropriate lighting. Yes, it'd be ideal to get some really good lights and do it properly, but the thing is at this level we often have to get the fastest lens possible and shoot with available light. Very rarely are we able to shoot in ideal circumstances, and so indie filmmaking often becomes about finding the best jerry-rigged solution.
Click to expand...

Sure, but that's not what he asked.
 
Sorry, just trying to illustrate a point-- that lighting the scene would indeed be better, and looking at lenses to do the job for you is not properly "lighting" a scene. I'm acutely aware of the realities of production and know that sometimes, all you can really do is get a fast lens and shoot it with available light... but let's not fall into the trap of thinking that's "lighting" the scene. We as filmmakers need to be honest with ourselves and our audience that we're taking the easy way out... and that's not meant to be judgmental, again I know that sometimes that's your only route. You can't always afford to rent a generator and/or replace bulbs... but getting a fast lens isn't going to be nearly as good as if you did those things, don't kid yourself.

As others have said, if you're truly unable to modify the light in the scene then get the fastest lens you can get your hands on and try not to bump the ISO too high. The best advice anyone can give in this situation is to find yourself a few different options and SHOOT SOME TESTS, then you can decide what YOU like best.
 
Maybe the OP can chime back in and clarify concerning the shot, the lighting & such, as a light pole could be a Sodium Vapor street light, or it could very well be a Chinese Lantern on a boom pole. And there are a number of ways to shoot a scene depending on the look he or she is trying to achieve, which would require the use of different focal length lenses. Could be the OP is shooting a single long shot needing a 300mm, or maybe they are shooting a wide needing something like an 18mm, singles with a 35mm, and over the shoulder cut aways using a 50mm. It could be an action Steadicam follow-along with a 16mm. No use bickering over a question which has no correct answer at this point!

All the Best!

Dave
 
Also just because you're shooting in low light does not mean you should get a fast lens like f1.2 and shoot wide open. A lens will not be its sharpest wide open, pulling focus will be a mess, and other lens artifacts can become apparent. You should be shooting in a sweet spot between f2.8 and f8 but its a matter of taste and what focal length lens you are using to begin with. I tend to use f2.8-f.5.6 the most.

You will need some form of light source even if only a street lamp. By positioning your subjects carefully you can make it work. If for whatever reason your image comes out flat looking you can grade the image by using a spot exposure effect make it look like your subjects were lit more than what was around them.

Below is a before and after frame taken from a recent music video I directed and DOP'd. The girl walks towards the camera and out of frame and focus is being pulled the entire time. As she leaves the frame a guy walks into it from the opposite direction and stops on a mark. We cut to a close up of him as he turns around to look at her as she walks off. He then walks out of frame.

This was shot with a 85mm lens quite far away from the subject, at least 40-50 feet in distance. Aperture was set for around f2.8. Look at the shadows by her feet going behind her to the left of the frame - those shadows are the strongest because it tells you that the light source was just to my right hand side out of the frame. I picked that stretch of sidewalk for a good reason, to use the "free" light. When I shot the reverse shot (not seen here) I cheated it and had the guy walk on a section of sidewalk where the same light source was located. Intercut, it looked great. You can see the completed music video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLFF6Oa8znU - the scene is at the very end of the video.

Before:
MainStill005.jpg


After:
MainStill004.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top