Do I need a faster or wider lens for handheld night city shots on a Sony A77 II?
Asked 1/13/2016
3 views
2 answers
0
I use a Sony A77 II with the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm zoom and I’m considering a Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5. I want to shoot city scenes at night using available light and avoid raising ISO too much because of noise. Would the 16-80mm be good enough, or would a wider lens like the 10-20mm help for this type of photography?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
10y ago
2 Answers
1
What max aperture is the Zeiss.
Do you have a link to a specification?
I have a Sony A77 mk1 which is somewhat worse in low light than a mk2 so gives a guide.
In general terms the A77i is goodish at ISO 800, bearable at 1600 and usable at 2400 or 3200 if you value a usable image over noise. ie 800 would be daytime max if you cared somewhat. More at night may be OK.
If you use a tripod or solidly brace the camera then there is no sensible smallest aperture except for subject movement issues.
For night time street photography or static building shots etc f/1.8 is reasonably useful in a city with shop lights, good street lighting etc if you take great care.
f/2.8 about as good (1.8/2.8)^2 =~ 40% as much light
f/3.5 = 4x less light than f/1.8 = 2 stops and is getting reasonably marginal. Camera can be braced and you can Ninja breathe but any subject movement may reduce photos to more art-statements than records. You will sometimes get 'lucky' with moving subjects, but with the A77 you need as much light as you can manage.
Above that anything can work sometimes.
As for focal length. For street photography on APSC the 16-80mm is liable to work well in more situations than a 10-20mm. The latter of course has it's place but the wideness limits the range of things it is excellent at. – Russell McMahon 8 mins ago
I have put just a few night-time photos in this album as examples of either Sony A77 or the slightly noisier A700. All relevant settings shown where known.
These were selected by randomly jumping through a "RandomMaybes" folder and stopping at relevant night shots. No merit claimed for any except that I like them for some reason (in most cases :-) ).
Originally by user6263. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user6263
10y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For night city photography, the main issue is light, not just focal length. A wider lens can let you use a slower shutter speed handheld, but the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 is not a “fast” low-light lens. At f/3.5 it gathers limited light, so it won’t avoid the need for higher ISO by itself.
If your subjects are static, a tripod or solid support helps far more than changing to another f/3.5 zoom. Then you can use longer exposures at low ISO. If you’re shooting handheld, high ISO is usually unavoidable at night, and you have to balance ISO noise, shutter speed, subject motion, and depth of field.
A lens with a much wider maximum aperture, such as around f/1.8, is more useful for handheld available-light night shooting than an f/3.5 ultra-wide zoom. Your 16-80mm can work for night scenes, especially static subjects, but it won’t eliminate the need for either higher ISO or longer exposures.
So: buy the 10-20mm if you need the wider field of view, not because you expect a big low-light advantage.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI10y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Which Sigma 10-20mm is better for a Nikon D90: f/4-5.6 or constant f/3.5?
Sony FE 28mm f/2 vs Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 for night photography
What are good ultra-wide lens alternatives to the Sigma 10-20mm for a Nikon D90 around a $500 budget?
Are 50mm f/1.8 lenses less sharp than 50mm f/2.8 lenses of similar design?
Sony DSC-WX60 vs Nikon Coolpix L610: which is better for low-light everyday photos?