does anyone have experience with the canon 50mm 1.4 indoor sports

[Ryan L]

I shoot my daughters indoor volleyball and our gymnasium has the worst light. I use a 50mm 1.8 right now and I usually have to use ISO640 @1.8 to acheive a shutter speed of 1/250th that seems to be about the slowest I can shoot without motion blur. I would like to know if anyone has tried this lens with indoor sports. I find that on my 50d I do not care for ISO640 very much, but ISO400 I can live with.

 

[Hardrock]

Sorry no experience with sports but lots with the 50F1.4. As far as the 50D goes you should be able to shoot ISO800 with no issue. Especially if the expossure is on. Do you print straight from camera?

 

[Taylor510ce]

You arent going to gain much from going to 1.4 from 1.8. Try shooting at ISO 800. I have heard that the in between stops on the ISO tend to not be as good due to the camera processing or something.....someone else can probably explain more 800 shouldnt be too bad, it wasnt on the t1i which shares most of the 50d guts.

 

[prodigy2k7]

get some noise reduction software, 800 iso should be good enough on a 50D

 

[Ryan L]

No I dont print straight from the camera. I shoot RAW and they just dont look great. I will try 800 I wasnt aware that in btw stops was different. I will give it a try. I would love to use my Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC but since the 1.8 wasnt cutting it I wasnt going to try it much

 

[Taylor510ce]

Is the issue with the pics noise related? Or do they just not look good overall? Could be the cheap glass or bad exposure, or the need for some more post processing.

 

[Ryan L]

no damnit its the noise!! Lol While the nifty fifty is cheap it produces sharp images. I can correct that horrible yellow from the lighting the graininess makes me think I am looking at news print. I have heard the 50d is great with noise but I just dont see it. Maybe it is the 640 I am curious if anyone else can chime in on this. Now that you mention it I shot a concert and think I used 800 and they didnt look like crap...hmm

 

[Ryan L]

sorry for the run on sentences and lack of punctuation. I post from my cell phone during the day. Punctuation is a pain at times...

 

[Hardrock]

This may sound silly but shoot it using raw and jpeg. For some reason my 50D does alot better with noise at high ISO (like 2000 and above) with JPEG than my raw editing software (CS3). I by no means am a photosop master so that may be the issue for me but I have a very hard time getting rid of noise in noisy images with CS3. It does a pretty decent job but the jpegs always come out better.

 

[Taylor510ce]

Haha, no problem, cell phone here also. Do a test shot at each ISO. Sometimes overexposing slightly can help with noise also. You can always add NR in post.

 

[Taylor510ce]

Which ISO how to use with the 7D - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Read the top post.

 

[table1349]

You arent going to gain much from going to 1.4 from 1.8. Try shooting at ISO 800. I have heard that the in between stops on the ISO tend to not be as good due to the camera processing or something.....someone else can probably explain more 800 shouldnt be too bad, it wasnt on the t1i which shares most of the 50d guts.

Sorry I have to disagree with you on this one. I shoot sports and I shoot the 50 f1.4. The advantage of the 1.4 is not in the difference in aperture although every little bit helps. The advantage is in focus speed of the USM motor in the 1.4 over the traditional cheaper, slower motor of the 1.8.

To the op, one thing that will help the noise issue of using a higher ISO is to do a custom white balance before you shoot and to get your exposure right in camera when you shoot, not just close and fix in post processing. If you exposure is dead on it will noticeably reduce the noise at high ISO. I always have a Sekonic L358 in my pocket when shooting sports, indoor or out, day or night.

 

[Taylor510ce]

You arent going to gain much from going to 1.4 from 1.8. Try shooting at ISO 800. I have heard that the in between stops on the ISO tend to not be as good due to the camera processing or something.....someone else can probably explain more 800 shouldnt be too bad, it wasnt on the t1i which shares most of the 50d guts.

Sorry I have to disagree with you on this one. I shoot sports and I shoot the 50 f1.4. The advantage of the 1.4 is not in the difference in aperture although every little bit helps. The advantage is in focus speed of the USM motor in the 1.4 over the traditional cheaper, slower motor of the 1.8.
.

Do we have to be overly in depth with each post? I meant in regards to the OPs original problem, not everything else under the sun. Clearly the 1.4 is an all around better lens, but that wasn't what he was asking. While you are correct in your assesment, the issue here wasn't focus speed, it was shutter speed, which he isn't going to gain much going from 1.8-1.4. Hence the need to bump up the ISO. I would bet that the main issue here is the 1/3 stop ISO settings he is using. Its not a real ISO in the sense that it ups the sensor sensetivity, its a "faked" ISO using exposure manipulation, which flies in the face of what you just said about getting the exposure right to reduce noise.

 

[Ryan L]

To the op, one thing that will help the noise issue of using a higher ISO is to do a custom white balance before you shoot and to get your exposure right in camera when you shoot, not just close and fix in post processing. If you exposure is dead on it will noticeably reduce the noise at high ISO. I always have a Sekonic L358 in my pocket when shooting sports, indoor or out, day or night.

You know I havent done a custom WB in there (well except when I found a piece of paper on the wall one time) I always forget my grey card, but I did not relilze that I would reduce my noise figure if I set it in camera. That may be helpful as well. I also do think the USM would be nicer than the 1.8 that I have, not to mention I'm guessing it is just built better as well. I have seen it around for 300, which for a USM lens of that aperture it seems like a steal to me still.

Do we have to be overly in depth with each post? I meant in regards to the OPs original problem, not everything else under the sun. Clearly the 1.4 is an all around better lens, but that wasn't what he was asking. While you are correct in your assesment, the issue here wasn't focus speed, it was shutter speed, which he isn't going to gain much going from 1.8-1.4. Hence the need to bump up the ISO. I would bet that the main issue here is the 1/3 stop ISO settings he is using. Its not a real ISO in the sense that it ups the sensor sensetivity, its a "faked" ISO using exposure manipulation, which flies in the face of what you just said about getting the exposure right to reduce noise.

I appreciate everyones help on this. I do think the partial ISO stops has a lot to do with it after reading the link you gave. Very informative. I will check this out next week. Her next game is Tuesday and Thursday so I will be able to follow up then.


Thanks again for all the input....I feel like I am learning a lot today for some reason. Things that I thought I already knew. (that would be a good title for a book...I am going to have to trademark that title...)

 

[HikinMike]

Don't be afraid to bump the ISO. I shoot gymnastics and we can't use flash. I'm using the 5D and usually the 70-200 f/4L, so I'm used to using ISO 3200, f/4 and if I can get 1/320...it's a good day! Usually 1/160 to 1/250 is the norm.