Low light, moving target

my experience shooting w/f1.8 on 85mm yielding a soft pic. its the tradeoff. if you want tack sharp pics, 2.8 and above or preferably 4 would be your best bet. so my opinion seconded some of the experts here, speedlite is the best bet. i own 24-105 too and love it fr outdoor purposes. and use it indoor with flash

Just my .02, but I love the 85mm on a crop for kids even indoors. I have a 30 and a 50, but neither allows me to get far enough away for candid portraits. With the other 2 all I usually get is crazy faces and poses. YMMV

Getting a lens that is one stop faster will allow your shutter speeds to go from 1/50 to 1/15 to only 1/100 to 1/30 sec. These speeds will not stop motion either.

My 24-105 is great for children outdoors. I use a flash when inside. A flash would be needed in my home even with an f/1.8 lens. Get a flash that tilts and swivels, learn to bounce the light.

mntbikejack wrote in post #13034962
I swapped the 24-105L out for the 17-55 2.8 IS. No regrets.

I agree the 17-55 is great; when going FF I sold the 17-55 2.8 and got a 24-105 thinking I would use it on both cameras (7d also).

I missed the 17-55 so bought a 16-35 2.8 and I use it on both cameras a lot more than the 24-105 - the 24-105 is my least-used lens! (especially now that I bought a used 28-300).

The 24-105 is a great lens when properly used. Get a good flash and you will be amazed at the results.

pol024 wrote in post #13035061
Just my .02, but I love the 85mm on a crop for kids even indoors. I have a 30 and a 50, but neither allows me to get far enough away for candid portraits. With the other 2 all I usually get is crazy faces and poses. YMMV

I'm with you. As others have said, 2.8 isn't going to get you there. 1/100 still isn't fast enough for kids. You really need to blast your ISO or use flash. Since you were already at high ISO, you have to go to a flash with that lens. However, using a prime to get below f/2.8, you can get decent shutter speeds with high ISO.

This one is sleeping, but an example of the 85mm in a 20x20 room. f/2 at ISO 800, 1/200th.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

snyder17315 wrote in post #13033764
After tonight's lens trial I'm seriously considering exchanging the 24-104L for a 17-55 (or possibly 15-85). I really hate losing the extra reach; but the f/2.8 may make up for it with pictures I can actually use/keep.

Instead of 17-55, for the same money you can get the same quality lens Sigma 17-50 OS and a good flash. This is a very good combination for indoor shots of kids.

For moving kids: you have to switch to Servo AF mode, and don't use wide open apertures (something like f/5.6 at 50mm should be good enough), and bounce the flash from the ceiling/wall. With low light and moving subject, regular AF is almost useless.

On a T2i like everyone stated get a flash first. I think 24-105 can be a good lens for a crop, but it really depends on the focal range you like. Many think 24 is not wide enough, others think it's more than wide and love having the longer end and knowing it can be used on FF in the future...I'm sure the red ring is an extra incentive too, heh... Anyway you need to figure that out for yourself.

Other options is to get some primes like a 28/30 and 50. I also like the option above of getting a Sigma 17-50 OS with a flash if you are considering a 17-55.

However it really comes down to your budget as well and what you anticipate to buy in the future...I sort of have a limit of what I can spend on camera gear so I personally have to choose wisely and be patient. Others can go FF off the bat with a L lens lineup and top of the line accessories...

You can always get the NiftyFifty for indoors that is the cheapest lens at F1.8

I would never be able to capture my daughter, niece, or nephew at that shutter speed. You've have to increase your speed if you want sharper photos. Put that 530 to uses...

Whatever lens I end up shooting with, it sounds like a 430 or 580ex II should be one of my next purchases for sure!

pulsar123 wrote in post #13035415
Instead of 17-55, for the same money you can get the same quality lens Sigma 17-50 OS and a good flash

That conflicts with many reports I've had on the 17-50 OS.

kin2son wrote in post #13034071
Prime is always better, regardless of indoor or outdoor:p Zoom is only good at one thing really - versatility. Nothing more than that.

Anyway, 85mm is too long for indoor in most cases, consider a fast prime within the 30-50mm range. 15-85 is also not the best choice for indoor as it's not 2.8.

the 70-200mk2 is like a prime lens

jonneymendoza wrote in post #13039889
the 70-200mk2 is like a prime lens

At a premium cost too. Chances are that the OP having just forked out ~$1k for the 24-105 isn't looking to drop another $2400 right away, plus MFD is 4 feet. This limits indoor (as in home) utility, as does scrambling around with the beast trying to get in position for kids. I would totally be hitting the objective end on things if I tried that here.

As for using lamps for light -- somehow, no matter how many lamps I turned on back when I started with this, I couldn't make a significant dent in EV. Natural light somehow seems to be much more potent. If a kid is sleeping, a lens with IS could be useful in situations where one gets a shutter that wouldn't ordinarily freeze subjection motion, but otherwise if the room is conducive a bounced/diffused flash probably has better utility. One finds many posts here stating axiomatically that bounced flash is awesome and mandatory, but I suspect that the posters enjoy McMansion-sized rooms with lots of open walls and few mirrors. Not everyone is in the Microsoft inner party or lives in South Succotash, however, and flash bouncing when the subject is 1' away from a wall is problematic. I actually have reasonable success with my Fong clone dome diffuser in my living room in that flash and subject geometries are much more forgiving and flexible.

I've had decent success bouncing off walls behind me (turning the flash to shoot up/into a solid wall near me). The few times it didn't quite work was when my shadow ends up in the picture.

anthony11 wrote in post #13041736
At a premium cost too. Chances are that the OP having just forked out ~$1k for the 24-105 isn't looking to drop another $2400 right away, plus MFD is 4 feet. This limits indoor (as in home) utility, as does scrambling around with the beast trying to get in position for kids. I would totally be hitting the objective end on things if I tried that here.

As for using lamps for light -- somehow, no matter how many lamps I turned on back when I started with this, I couldn't make a significant dent in EV. Natural light somehow seems to be much more potent. If a kid is sleeping, a lens with IS could be useful in situations where one gets a shutter that wouldn't ordinarily freeze subjection motion, but otherwise if the room is conducive a bounced/diffused flash probably has better utility. One finds many posts here stating axiomatically that bounced flash is awesome and mandatory, but I suspect that the posters enjoy McMansion-sized rooms with lots of open walls and few mirrors. Not everyone is in the Microsoft inner party or lives in South Succotash, however, and flash bouncing when the subject is 1' away from a wall is problematic. I actually have reasonable success with my Fong clone dome diffuser in my living room in that flash and subject geometries are much more forgiving and flexible.