Suggestions for indoor/low light lense

[Keiffer]

Hi all, I ran into a slight problem last week while attending my youngest sons first play. Not enought light using my 28-105 3.5-4.5 lense, I couldn't get a focus lock. I thought being that it was a play I assumed it would have like stage lighting...I was wrong LOL. Any suggestions for indoor low light situations?

[Miika]

As you can't use external flash in these situations (which would also provide red focus assistant light), your only option is to get a lens that lets more light into the camera.

You need a lens with small f-number. You probably want some reach too, I've found EF 85 f/1.8 very useful. EF 50 f/1.4 is also often recommended.

Easily affordable

EF 50 f/1.8

Midprice

EF 50 f/1.4
EF 85 f/1.8

Expensive

EF 85 f/1.2 L
EF 135 f/2.0 L

Using monopod or tripod also helps to focus, as the camera shake is reduced. Low contrast situation is difficult for any lens - you can always use manual focus.

A lens with rear lens element focus motor system (for exampe 85 f/1.8) focuses faster than one that moves a heavy front lens element (85 f/1.2) -- but accuracy is often compromised.

Miika

[crusher420]

I just picked up that EF 50mm f1.8 and it is a sweet lense.

I would easily say that is you are on a budget it is definitely the way to go.

Everyone that I know with Canon Gear has this lense because it is so good...and I know that some people are particular about having the metal mounted version...but my friends that have the II version score just as many great shots with it.

[tim]

85mm F1.8 or 50mm F1.4 are my picks.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The 85mm f/1.8 is the little miracle in this catagory...

[Keiffer]

I was actually trying to decide between the 50 and 85 in particular and really leaning towards the 85. But than again the wallet starts talking and trys to make me believe that 70 bucks and a crop will make up for 35 more mm's and 200 bucks LOL.
So the difference between the 2 50's is one is metal mounted and the other is plastic? and how can you tell? also is that the same with the 85?

[Miika]

85/1.8 has metal mount.

[blinking8s]

85 f/1.8 all the way

[blue_max]

50, 85 or 135 – all good choices, but it depends on the amount of reach you need. Try and asses how far away you were and shoot at that length to see if it would have been ok (with your old lens). I imagine the 85 would be better. You would never regret buying it and could sell easily.

But don't expect miracles! These are fast lenses, but they do need some light!! It is surprising how little light there can actually be on a dull day in a room with windows.

Graham

[Longwatcher]

I was actually trying to decide between the 50 and 85 in particular and really leaning towards the 85. But than again the wallet starts talking and trys to make me believe that 70 bucks and a crop will make up for 35 more mm's and 200 bucks LOL.
So the difference between the 2 50's is one is metal mounted and the other is plastic? and how can you tell? also is that the same with the 85?

Both the 50/1.4 and the first version of the 50/1.8 are/were metal
the second version of the 50/1.8 (50/1.8 II) is more plastic.
Technically they all have metal mounts, it is the lens barrel that is plastic or metal.

For stage I would try for the best (85/1.2) at low light. But the 50/1.8 is your best low cost choice, 50/1.4 next best and somewhat better quality overall (build and picture).
If going for one person then 135/2 might be better, but to catch the set I think the 50 should work.

Lastly of course, try manual focus, that's what is there for. I get forced to use it all the time by low-light or lens/extender combinations.

Just my opinion,

[Andy_T]

Keiffer,

take a look at this review (http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/)for more information about the differences between the 50/1.4 and the 50/1.8.

For me, the most important of this differences is the much nicer bokeh of the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 ... take a look at this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69785) for examples.

I got the 50/1.8 MKI (the older version with the metal mount, got it used for $120, as it's more expensive used than the version with the plastic mount new), because I also could not justify to pay some 200$ more on the 50/1.4 (which I would have wanted to buy).

While it is a very sharp lens at f/2.5, the bokeh does not always look very nice when I am doing portraits. There are situations (e.g. backlit situations like the first image in the thread), where it really sucks. For that reason, I use my Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR for that, which is very sharp at f/3.5 with a very nice bokeh and has the convenience of being a 28-75 zoom. I assume that for your applications, it will not be fast enough.

The other differences, of course, are sharpness and focus accuracy. While my 50/1.8 is pretty sharp at f/2.0, I prefer to use it at f/2.5 to f/2.8, because it is just a bit sharper there. In images, however, focus accuracy can become more of a problem than sharpness, because DOF is so thin at f/1.8 that the accuracy of the 50/1.8 is sometimes not good enough resulting in poorly focused images. The 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 should do a much better job here allowing you to use the lens wide open. That amounts to an extra stop ... important for your applications.

So ... all that said ... the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 will probably give you more keepers, also the range of the 85/1.8 might be more convenient (unless the stage is very small). That's why the 85/1.8 is the next lens on my wish list.

Also ... keep in mind that you can use your camera at ISO 1600 and use some noise reduction (like the free noiseware community edition) to eliminate the noise in the pictures.

Best regards,
Andy

[tim]

I recently sold my 50mm F1.8 lens, as I wasn't getting many "keeper" with it. The 50mm F1.4 is a much better lens, in every way.

The lens choice really depends on your distance from the stage.

[condyk]

Of course, you might want to take shots before and after the performance when light may be better, in a changing room is a good spot. Also, not irritating for others in the audience. Where you sit pretty much determines what you need length wise! I'd sell what you have and go for the 85mm Canon and the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 to give a tad more wideness for the back stage shots and general walk around.

[Keiffer]

You guys rock!! Thanks for all the great comments and suggestions. I think it will be the 85 then, I didn't realize the 50 wouldn't produce a sharp pic @ 1.8. And I really want something I can use wide open. The 85 will probably work out best for me in this situation. I normally don't do indoor shoots that often but It's nice to have something that is up for the job when I do:-)
Thanks again guys for going into detail with your comments they helped tremendously.

[roanjohn]

Easily affordable

EF 50 f/1.8

Midprice

EF 50 f/1.4
EF 85 f/1.8

Expensive

EF 85 f/1.2 L
EF 135 f/2.0 L



Would like to add:

Expensive:
35 f1.4
24 f1.4

SUPER EXPENSIVE:
50 f1.0 L (if you can find it)

Ro1

[93octane]

What about a good indoor lens like for birthday parties, family gathering,etc.. using flash at a minimum but being able to fit 2 or 3 persons in the shot. I have the 50mm f1.8 II which is good indoors but its always hard to move back and try to catch more then 2 persons in the picture. Would the Tamron 28-75 work well in these situations???

[Keiffer]

The Tamron 28-75 is not a low light lense as far as I know, I believe when wide open it's 3.5.

[RockSlut]

Sorry to contradict you Keiffer, but if you're talking about the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di you will find that it is a constant F/2.8 lens. I find it to be an excellent low-light lens. Obviously, not quite as fast as my 50mm f/1.8 (or likely to be as good as any of Canon's fast primes), however I find it much more versatile and I therefore use it much more often.

Samples of the Tamron's 28-75mm f/2.8's low-light performance are on my website. It has been the only lens I have used for perfomance shoots since 18 March 2005.

[93octane]

RockSlut any direct link to the pictures I went to both website very confusing finding pictures taken with this lens :o Yes I'm talking about the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di and I already own a 50mm F1.8 but its too wide for indoors (house)

[RockSlut]

Sorry if my site layout is confusing you. Here is three recent samples.
http://www.rocksluts.net.au/bands/2005/15apr05/IMG_7369_e.jpg
The Mess Hall
http://www.rocksluts.net.au/bands/2005/18mar05/vlb/IMG_3864_e.jpg
Vanlustbader
http://www.rocksluts.net.au/events/2005/18mar05/IMG_4877_e.jpg
Pop Trash
Here's some links to a couple more Pop Trash photos
http://www.rocksluts.net.au/events/2005/18mar05/IMG_4785_e.jpg
http://www.rocksluts.net.au/events/2005/18mar05/IMG_4869_e.jpg

Or... if you want to look at wedding photos... My sister's wedding last week. i shot exclusively with the Tamron 28-75mm through the ceremony (no flash) and with a 420ex flash at the reception. There are several pages full of photos here (http://www.rocksluts.net.au/zoeandmyles/12jun05/12jun05_c/12jun05_c.html). Please bear in mind that I am not a wedding photographer, and have absolutely no desire to ever be one.

[Keiffer]

I stand corrected Rock:-) Thanks for the links also, Now you got me wondering if I could get away with 2.8 in low light LOL. I know this lense is very popular and well recieved here, I just might have to get one to try it out.

[grego]

What about a good indoor lens like for birthday parties, family gathering,etc.. using flash at a minimum but being able to fit 2 or 3 persons in the shot. I have the 50mm f1.8 II which is good indoors but its always hard to move back and try to catch more then 2 persons in the picture. Would the Tamron 28-75 work well in these situations???

Sigma has a 30mm f/1.8 and now a new 30mm f/1.4. One of those would probably get the job done.