Dark ride lens: Your Input

[Llamaface]

It's been 7 years since I was at Disney and I've never done any photography there.

I'm currently running a Nikon D90 with a Tamron 17-50 2.8 as my main walk around lens. I'm thinking this isn't going to be fast enough on many of the dark rides and I'm also feeling the urge from my film days to get back to primes.

What focal lengths to you folks find most comfortable for the dark rides keeping in mind the DX crop factor of 1.5x?

I'm considering all of the following. Feedback is most welcome.

Sigma 30 1.4
Nikkor 35 1.8
Nikkor 35 f2 (in case I go full frame in the future)
Nikkor 50 1.8
Nikkor 50 1.4G
Sigma 50 1.4
Nikkor 85 1.8
Nikkor 85 1.4

Presently I have the Tamron 17-50, the Nikkor 70-300VR and the Nikkor 10.5 fish.


Next question...What type of bag solution do you find to be the most useful? Let's assume 1 body, 2-3 primes, 1 midrange zoom. I normally run a Domke shoulder bag but I'm looking for a system that's going to allow me to get on all the rides with my equipment.

Has anyone ever tried some of the component belt systems like the Think Tank? Would a belt system work considering the various lapbars, etc?

What about a vest?

 

[mkt]

As far as lenses go, I would venture out with the 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, depending on your budget. That's my go-to for shows at nightclubs/bars, which IMO have similar lighting.

 

[PhotoDave219]

It's been 7 years since I was at Disney and I've never done any photography there.

I'm currently running a Nikon D90 with a Tamron 17-50 2.8 as my main walk around lens. I'm thinking this isn't going to be fast enough on many of the dark rides and I'm also feeling the urge from my film days to get back to primes.

What focal lengths to you folks find most comfortable for the dark rides keeping in mind the DX crop factor of 1.5x?

I'm considering all of the following. Feedback is most welcome.

Sigma 30 1.4
Nikkor 35 1.8
Nikkor 35 f2 (in case I go full frame in the future)
Nikkor 50 1.8
Nikkor 50 1.4G
Sigma 50 1.4
Nikkor 85 1.8
Nikkor 85 1.4

Presently I have the Tamron 17-50, the Nikkor 70-300VR and the Nikkor 10.5 fish.


Next question...What type of bag solution do you find to be the most useful? Let's assume 1 body, 2-3 primes, 1 midrange zoom. I normally run a Domke shoulder bag but I'm looking for a system that's going to allow me to get on all the rides with my equipment.

Has anyone ever tried some of the component belt systems like the Think Tank? Would a belt system work considering the various lapbars, etc?

What about a vest?

PM me later. I use the Think Tank system on a daily basis.

 

[Llamaface]

Thanks for yor thoughts mkt and PhotoDave219.

If anyone else wants to add something, feel free. I've got far too much time before the planned trip.

 

[WDWFigment]

The Sigma 30 f/1.4 is an awesome lens. I would highly recommend it. 50mm on D90 is going to be too tight of a composition most of the time. The Sigma 30 is well worth the extra money over the Nikkor 50 or 35 1.8. Well worth it.

PM me if you want more information on that lens.

 

[Llamaface]

... 50mm on D90 is going to be too tight of a composition most of the time...

This is my worry. I'm wondering about a 30mm/85mm combo and skipping the 50.

 

[DebS]

I find my 50mm to be too tight for the parades. I like the 30mm Sigma for night parades and indoor rides. I have a small Domke shoulder bag that's been my go to bag. It fits nicely under seats like Soarin and ST. I keep trying other bags but they're usually too big or too bulky.

 

[Llamaface]

Thanks WDWFigment and DebS.

 

[KeithVH]

Not to be disagreeable but I'm thinking even the 30 (really 45mm) will still not be wide enough. I have the same Tamron and, in many cases, just don't find it covers what I need. With a prime, maybe shooting ahead or slightly off of that it would be OK but shooting to your left or right, I'm thinking the limited angle of view might be frustrating. Although the 30 or 35 would obviously be your best choice since anything wider/faster is a LOT of money.

Might I suggest to not forsake the 17-50 and get a copy of Noise Ninja just in case if the prime doesn't work out. 2.8 @ ISO1600 might just be your friend with a little PP.

 

[Llamaface]

Thanks Keith.

I agree, there certainly is a lack of wide fast lenses for Nikon out there. The 10.5 obviously gets me as wide as I want but it's still "only" 2.8. Well, at least the D90 is no slouch when it comes to shooting at 1600.

It sounds like I need a trial run trip to check my distances and give the 17-50 a shot. Ya, that's it. Who's with me? :animwink:

 

[WDWFigment]

Not to be disagreeable but I'm thinking even the 30 (really 45mm) will still not be wide enough. I have the same Tamron and, in many cases, just don't find it covers what I need. With a prime, maybe shooting ahead or slightly off of that it would be OK but shooting to your left or right, I'm thinking the limited angle of view might be frustrating. Although the 30 or 35 would obviously be your best choice since anything wider/faster is a LOT of money.

Might I suggest to not forsake the 17-50 and get a copy of Noise Ninja just in case if the prime doesn't work out. 2.8 @ ISO1600 might just be your friend with a little PP.

f/2.8 is not going to cut it anywhere on Peter Pan's Flight, Haunted Mansion, or Maelstrom and is going to be pretty lousy on a lot of the dark rides. I used my Tokina 11-16 f/28 on SpaceShip Earth, Buzz, and a couple other dark rides, and it was fine, but I wouldn't want it to be my only dark ride lens. Even on those attractions, I was pushing the ISO to 3200 or 6400.

From my experience, 30mm is absolutely fine for dark rides as far as focal lengths go.

 

[WDWFigment]

Here are some examples. All using the D90.

Tokina:






Sigma 30:

 

[mkt]

@WDWFigment... do you have any non-WDW shots using the Tokina you could share?

It's tempting me...

 

[Llamaface]

Tom, give me a sense of perspective here. Those 30mm shots...how much cropping have you done?

It's been so long since my last Disney trip, I can't really recall the typical distance from the "scene". Those shots look a lot "closer" than I recall. I know it's going to vary from ride to ride...would 10-15 feet be typical?

Those Tokina shots show that some the action is right on top of you.


EDIT: To add another thought to the discussion. Manual focus. Since we're turning off the focus assist, have you found manual focus a neccessity for that reason? Do you guys just prefer the control the MF gives you when dealing with such small depth of field? Give me your thoughts on manual focus vs. AF. When do you guys use MF, if at all, etc. Frankly, if MF is nearly a requirement I may look into some older glass that's better designed for MF.

 

[WDWFigment]

@WDWFigment... do you have any non-WDW shots using the Tokina you could share?

It's tempting me...

The Tokina is a sweet, sweet lens. It's no Nikkor 14-24, but it's also not the price of the 14-24. A lot of people complain about the limited focal range (11-16), but I almost always use it on 11mm, so it doesn't bother me at all. Having f/2.8 instead of f/4 more than makes up for not having a wider focal range. I don't have many non-WDW shots with that lens posted online, but here are a few of my better images. A lot more WDW images are in my trip report (see signature):























Hope that helps. I'd HIGHLY recommend that lens. The only downside is that it's in high demand and is tough to find, so it's difficult to find a deal on it. If you can get it for around $550, you're doing well.

Tom, give me a sense of perspective here. Those 30mm shots...how much cropping have you done?

It's been so long since my last Disney trip, I can't really recall the typical distance from the "scene". Those shots look a lot "closer" than I recall. I know it's going to vary from ride to ride...would 10-15 feet be typical?

Those Tokina shots show that some the action is right on top of you.


EDIT: To add another thought to the discussion. Manual focus. Since we're turning off the focus assist, have you found manual focus a neccessity for that reason? Do you guys just prefer the control the MF gives you when dealing with such small depth of field? Give me your thoughts on manual focus vs. AF. When do you guys use MF, if at all, etc. Frankly, if MF is nearly a requirement I may look into some older glass that's better designed for MF.

Each of those shots has about 25% cropped out, at least.

With PPF and HM, manual focus is a must, because the lens can't find enough contrast in the scene (often) on which to focus. It'll just hunt and hunt most of the time. Autofocus certainly works, but not with the consistency of MF. Then you have the added difficulty of being able to see through the viewfinder in such dark conditions to MF. That's one of the reasons I really wish I had a D700 (plus that sweet high ISO). On a dark ride, you don't have the time to use MF to focus 'with precision'. You're lucky if you can focus with even some degree of accuracy (and you'll notice that none of my dark ride shots above from my MF dark rides are tack sharp...good luck manually focusing with that much precision on a moving attraction through a small viewfinder in the dark. If it happens, it's due mostly to luck).

 

[mkt]

@WDWFigment.

You've sold me

Now to hurry up and have some clients pay me so I can buy it!

 

[PhotoDave219]

Thanks Keith.

I agree, there certainly is a lack of wide fast lenses for Nikon out there. The 10.5 obviously gets me as wide as I want but it's still "only" 2.8. Well, at least the D90 is no slouch when it comes to shooting at 1600.

It sounds like I need a trial run trip to check my distances and give the 17-50 a shot. Ya, that's it. Who's with me? :animwink:

ISO 1600? Gotta upgrade man.... D700/D3 is where its at.

My general everyday walk around setup is 20/2.8 and 70-200/2.8. or an 85/1.8.

(Tomorrows football setup is 400, 70-200 and 50 weather permitting)

I understand the dillema of a 50/1.8 on a DX crop body. I love the look on a Full Frame body but I've never had a problem with being too tight - I will zoom with my feet if necessary.

Tom, i love the photos but where are the people, man? The People!

 

[KeithVH]

ISO 1600? Gotta upgrade man.... <SNIP>

Tom, i love the photos but where are the people, man? The People!

They're probably all in bed and he's taking pictures at 3AM or some such to be the last person (couple) in the park . . .

 

[WDWFigment]

@WDWFigment.

You've sold me

Now to hurry up and have some clients pay me so I can buy it!

One thing: I think I saw that you mentioned (in some previous thread) that you have a D5000. It won't autofocus on a D5000. Ultra Wide Angle lenses are about the easiest lenses to manually focus, but you should still be prepared for that.

ISO 1600? Gotta upgrade man.... D700/D3 is where its at.

I push the D90 to ISO 6400 all the time. It's not as pretty as the D700/D3, to be certain, but the price is certainly a lot prettier. Now maybe if I had someone paying me for my pictures I could justify it, but for now, I am better off spending that money on things like food and shelter.

I understand the dillema of a 50/1.8 on a DX crop body. I love the look on a Full Frame body but I've never had a problem with being too tight - I will zoom with my feet if necessary.

That might be a little tough for most on the dark rides!

Tom, i love the photos but where are the people, man? The People!

They're probably all in bed and he's taking pictures at 3AM or some such to be the last person (couple) in the park . . .

There are other people at WDW? Hmmm, not sure about that one.

With the exception of some cool blurred long exposure Main Street shots, I actually much prefer shooting WDW at night without any people. Plus, it saves me the headache of having to worry that some idiot is going to blindly knock over my tripod.

Keith's right though; I'd bet most are in bed when we are out...

 

[PhotoDave219]

Oh trust me, I'm not paid much. I just finally looked at my paycut from 8 months back. Jeeez.....