I wouldn't describe any fast prime I've used as rubbish wide open tbh, far from it actually IMO. Yes they're not as sharp as they would be stopped down, but far from rubbish and still noticeably better than your average kit lens.Bear in mind that most so-called "fast" lenses are rubbish used wide open and usually only have a tiny bit of central sharpness (if at all) and need to be stopped down at least a couple of stops to get acceptably sharp pictures. Will still be better than a kit lens though, as that also needs stopping down.
Exceptions are good F1.4 lenses, such as the Sigma Art 35mm F1.4 which is pretty sharp wide open and improves rapidly with 1 or 2 stops down. Problem is, such lenses are pricey (£600 and up) and heavy because of the large glass elements.
Bounce/diffused flash is the way to go with cheaper lenses as you can use F5.6/F6.3 etc. which will allow freezing of motion and decent sharpness due to aperture
They look blurry and a bit noisy (although I'm only on the iphone at the mo) suggesting too slow a shutter and high ISO. The only way to resolve this is raise ISO and accept more noise, or shoot with a wider aperture.Some examples of what I mean:
That being said, a faster lens will always be beneficial in low light.
Most will opt for a 50mm 1.8 or similar prime, sacrificing the zoom feature for light grabbing ability.
Agreed, 24, 28mm or 35mm are better walkabout primes on a crop body.I had the 50mm f1.8 on my very old nikon d40 which is like an ancient ancestor to the 3100. I found the 50mm too close so I would not recommend it as a general walk around lens on DX. I'd personally recommend the 35mm f1.8 for a DX camera like the d3100.
I agree, looking at those 3 shots on the PC they all look like camera shake is more of a deal than subject movement to me at least.Only for non moving subjects
3795 is definitely camera shake, not surprising with a 2s shot. 3813 looks more like movement of the people rather than camera shake, looking at the rides etc they're not particularly blurry to my eyes (except the ones moving ), which is pretty impressive considering it's shot at 1/8 second. The last one looks to be a combination of the two, camera shake and moving subjects. Camera shake isn't 'that' bad looking at the red kiosk.I agree, looking at those 3 shots on the PC they all look like camera shake is more of a deal than subject movement to me at least.
3795.jpg - the sparkler/torch scene is a 2 second exposure at 30mm, F4.5 and 3200ISO - not much is going to preserve the lighting of the shot without showing some blur on the people. If it is a bunch of sparklers you're going to get some movement from the lighting. A faster lens and higher ISO might have worked but still a big ask.
3813.jpg - the silhouette of people is 1/8th of a second at 50mm, F5.6 and ISO3200. A faster lens would definitely have got that down to a speed you could hand hold, but that person's arm would probably blur out anyway.
3816.jpg - is 1/15th at 35mm, F5.0 and ISO3200. A faster lens would definitely help, you could probably have used flash without ruining the scene.
Based on the focal lengths then I guess a 35mm prime would be worth a look.
Various bits of software can do it. I use mac and just open the image up in preview and click cmd + i (ie get info). I'm sure PC will have a similar thing. Alternatively you can see it in editing software such as lightroom.How are you guys getting the exif data?
I had this function years ago but can't remember how to do it now.
Ah, got it.Various bits of software can do it. I use mac and just open the image up in preview and click cmd + i (ie get info). I'm sure PC will have a similar thing. Alternatively you can see it in editing software such as lightroom.