Low light - What to buy? Body/Lens/Tripod?

[SunnyHours]

Hi all,
I'm an amateur photographer, I do mostly outdoor photography, abstract, urban, clouds, nature, animals and I also do "party" photography
I'm interested in macro but I'm not so keen on flash so I'd like to keep away for now. Macro is not a priority at all it's just an interest...for now.
Here's what I have:
Nikon D40
Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G (Kit lens)
Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G

I have 2 choices basically;
1- Buy a new lens (1 fast zoom or 2 fast primes)
2- Buy a new body

Now the questions:
If I go with a new lens, it would either be 1.4,1.8 or 2.8 apertures so how many stops would I be gaining? Would it be enough?
If I go with a new body what would you recommend prosumer-wise? and would you wait for a newer body release before buying?
Also maybe a small tripod, good quality but not too expensive

Having a D40 is sometimes (more often than not ) a pain in the ass...no bracketing, no index dial, slow AF and no lens motor...
Please help me make a good decision with a somewhat limited budget
Thanks!

 

[Vinny]

You got a couple of problems - a camera with poor high ISO performance and slow glass.. For general photography where there isn't much movement a tripod might help but if you're shooting people or city scenes you'll get motion blur - probably a new camera with a faster lens. Not trying to be stupid but "what's enough"? Not exactly sure but I think a f1.4 lens will give you about 2 1/2 stops over what you have now. What ISO do you shoot now?

There's another thread on here where they are talking ISO performance and it seems that full frame gives much better low light performance than crop sensor, maybe the new d7000 from Nikon may be good for you. Unfortunately good equipment costs a lot of money but Nikon has a few consumer grade primes at f1.8 that seem to get good reviews.

 

[SunnyHours]

The problem is that when I bought my D40 I didn't know anything technical about photography. Therefore ISO didn't mean anything to me at the time. I'm a night owl so shooting at ISO400 tops is quite limiting. I try to use the auto ISO since at ISO600 it isn't so bad but at ISO800 it's so noisy it's unusable...I'm also pretty steady so I can usually shoot at 1/30s.
So I'm mostly looking for a beginner low-light kit. Probably a new body, a portrait lens and a wide-angle lens. As I've said maybe a tripod but it probably be afterwards...
I was looking at the D7000, the 50mm 1.4d (I like the aperture ring but I'm wondering if the AF is fast, or would going for the 50mm 1.4G worth it?) as for the wide-angle I have no idea what would be best...
Thanks for the reply

 

[bazooka]

I'm curious as to why your counting out a flash? In my opinion, adding a flash is easily the best bang-for-your-buck addition you can have that will drastically improve your shots, not to mention you're understanding of light will take a leap foward.

EDIT: Let me restate... having a light won't cause your understanding of light to leap foward, but it will give you a great opportunity to learn more...

 

[KenC]

One key question is whether you could do what you want with the very limited depth of field you would get at f1.4 or 2. If not, or if sometimes not, then you are better off with a body that allows higher ISO. You could also get a 50/1.8 for not much additional money and have both options at least in the normal focal length area.

 

[ks0385]

I'm curious as to why your counting out a flash? In my opinion, adding a flash is easily the best bang-for-your-buck addition you can have that will drastically improve your shots, not to mention you're understanding of light will take a leap foward.

EDIT: Let me restate... having a light won't cause your understanding of light to leap foward, but it will give you a great opportunity to learn more...

Not to hijack but... How much better is the "off-camera" flash as compared to the pop-up flash? I have a D90.

Also have a Canon S95 and I like that flash better than the D90 flash...

 

[SunnyHours]

A speedlite is better for many reasons...the biggest being the ability to use it as a bounce flash...
Back on point though...
I'm looking at the D7000 right now and I really like the specs. I also saw "real-life" results which I find very impressive!
The reason why I would like to stay away from a flash is the unnaturalness it sometime gives to a shot.
Well as for the DOF I really have no idea as I have never used a fast lens. Although I can't wait to experiment with the new possibilities my new gear will bring
The only thing left to find is which body? and which lenses? anyone have any suggestions for lenses?

 

[CxThree]

Do yourself a large favor at this point in your photography life. Get a flash and learn how to use it correctly. Proper flash use can produce images that do not "look" like a flash was used or give the look you have grown to dislike. There are several good books out there. Start with this one.

Amazon.com: On-Camera Flash Techniques for Digital Wedding and Portrait Photography (9781584282587): Neil van Niekerk: Books


Don't get me wrong. I understand the creative look people like when calling themselves Natural Light photographers. I just find natural light to be very constraining. Ie. Time of day, location, direction, etc. Give me my flash any day. If I have my camera, I have my flash unit on it. That's just my opinion and you will find many more here.

 

[mikehaugen]

^ I agree with above poster, flash does work wonders if used correctly... if only I could figure that part out. I have gotten much better, thanks in large to the book recommended above.

 

[o hey tyler]

I'm curious as to why your counting out a flash? In my opinion, adding a flash is easily the best bang-for-your-buck addition you can have that will drastically improve your shots, not to mention you're understanding of light will take a leap foward.

EDIT: Let me restate... having a light won't cause your understanding of light to leap foward, but it will give you a great opportunity to learn more...

Not to hijack but... How much better is the "off-camera" flash as compared to the pop-up flash? I have a D90.

Also have a Canon S95 and I like that flash better than the D90 flash...

I was shooting a glass blower the other night creating a swiss percolator bong. During that time, I was switching between flash and no flash just to see which I preferred.


20110328-IMG_0753.jpg by Tyler Deeeeee, on Flickr

The EXIF is:
Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/2.8
Focal Length 50 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Flash Off, Did not fire
Exposure Program Manual

The shot after, I turned my flash on and set it to TTL (which calculates the flash exposure for you based on your aperture, ISO, and available light)


20110328-IMG_0763.jpg by Tyler Deeeeee, on Flickr

Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.013 sec (1/80)
Aperture f/2.8
Focal Length 50 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Flash On, Fired

As you can see, the shot with flash has better lighting overall, and it doesn't look like popup flash in the least because I was bouncing the light off the ceiling.

 

[SunnyHours]

Ok I'm sold now!
I'll probably go with a D7000 body, is there a flash you could recommend? I'm hesitating between the SB-600 and the newer SB-700, mainly because of the price but also because it'll be used for many years to come, so durability is a big criteria and I'll keep it for a long while so it might be worth it to go with the higher end?...I'm almost pretty sure I won't need the SB-900 (and if I do well it'll time for me to get a 2nd flash anyway...).
By the way nice shot and nice subject Where did you go to get those shots? Also I wonder how the perc turned out hehe

 

[mikehaugen]

I would say whichever you decide, durability won't be the issue. I am not familiar with Nikon systems so I don't know the difference between the two, but usually with Canon and Nikon the build quality is good no matter what.

 

[o hey tyler]

Ok I'm sold now!
I'll probably go with a D7000 body, is there a flash you could recommend? I'm hesitating between the SB-600 and the newer SB-700, mainly because of the price but also because it'll be used for many years to come, so durability is a big criteria and I'll keep it for a long while so it might be worth it to go with the higher end?...I'm almost pretty sure I won't need the SB-900 (and if I do well it'll time for me to get a 2nd flash anyway...).
By the way nice shot and nice subject Where did you go to get those shots? Also I wonder how the perc turned out hehe

He has a glass blowing studio in his basement with two torches. The perc looked great, I didn't get to try it though.


Swiss Perc-2 by Tyler Deeeeee, on Flickr

You can view the whole set here: Blowing Glass - a set on Flickr

 

[SunnyHours]

it's actually not so durability as in material toughness and all but more on the side of "future-proof" electronics that I'm worried...it's a rather big investment and I wanna be sure I won't end up thinking in 5 years "Crap! I knew I should of bought the SB-700! Dang!". I much prefer thinking "I'm glad I saved the 100$ by going with the SB-600, I get great results!". All in all it's mostly a question of "is it worth 100$ for the upgrade?".
Very nice stemless bong :thumbup:

 

[kundalini]

A speedlite is better for many reasons...the biggest being the ability to use it as a bounce flash...
Back on point though...
I'm looking at the D7000 right now and I really like the specs. I also saw "real-life" results which I find very impressive!
The reason why I would like to stay away from a flash is the unnaturalness it sometime gives to a shot.

Your bias is due to ignorance. Nothing that some study and practical application can't resolve.

Further down you are more inclined to the idea. The SB600 is a little workhorse but does not have a sync terminal. It's not a deal breaker because there are some work arounds. I have the SB600 and a few SB800s. I've not used the SB700, but some of my reading would make me consider it over the SB600 if I had only one flash.

I would also suggest the flash before a lens purchase. The two lenses you have already are not to be sneezed at with sufficient lighting.