fast prime for indoor and portrait

I buying 2 new lenses, one will be an "always on my camera" type of lens probably the 24-105 f4 and I'm looking for something that I can use for low light situation mainly indoor and possibly portraits, so since the obvious solution is a prime
I'm asking you guys what lens do you think I should get? (50mm or less)
any thoughts by someone with first hand experience with any of the lenses in that range will be welcome

oh I should probably mention that I own the 17-40 f4 and the 70-200 f4 so I really need a lens with a large apreture

Any and all comments/suggestions will be gladly accepted

Welcome .

What camera?

thanks
canon rebel T2I

Canon 35L if it isn't out of your budget. Or else Sigma 30mm f/1.4.. I always find 50 too long for 1.6 crops for indoor use..

The Canon 35L is definitely out of my buget but the Sigma sounds good although I'm a bit hesitant about buying a third party lens because I've never done it before and I heard some bad expereinces from other people
Is the Sigma better then the Canon 35 f2 beside the obvious apreture?

Sigma 30 is the one you want. Perfect lens for indoors (and out).

There are bad experiences out there for pretty much every single lens on the market. Does that mean you are now scared of buying new lenses altogether?

The canon 35 f2 and sigma 30 1.4 are pretty much on par in terms of IQ, but the sigma (obviously) goes to 1.4, has HSM, FTM, better build, comes with a hood (I think the 35 f2 has a screw on hood, which is bad, and in any case you have to buy it separately), longer warranty, and nicer bokeh (35 f2 can give jittery bokeh).

Unless your budget is really that tight, I'd spring for the sigma.

I also tried the canon 28 1.8 at a store when I was making the same decision, and decided there was no way I'd be happy with that instead of the sigma.

Finally, look at the amount of posts alone in the sample image threads, which show the sigma having over 3x more posts than the 28 1.8 and 35 f2 combined, which should tell you something about its popularity.

I have the Canon 35f2 and the Canon 50f1.4. At f2, they produce very similar images. I use my 35f2 more than my other lenses. It has a couple of weak spots. AF is accurate and fast, but not quite as fast as the 50f1.4 and nowhere near the speed of the 85f1.8. The lens is prone to flare if you shoot into the sun - I just avoid that. I am not bothered by the sound of the AF, but some people are. The Canon hood clips on, and it stays on the lens all the time - the combo is light and compact.
Inside and outside, it is my favorite lens. The 35f2 is light and sharp on my T2i.

If you plan on buying the Sigma 30, I would go to a B&M store and try it out first. They are known to have focus issues - some obvious, some not so - that I imagine are the result of Sigma having to reverse engineer Canon's AF protocol. Also be aware that the Sigma has a rather long MFD when compared to the Canon 28mm f/1.8. Also be aware that there is the possibility that you may buy the 30, have to send it in for calibration (everybody here seems to recommend it, but I don't agree), get it back not working properly and have no recourse since you would be past your return date. It's the chance one takes when going 3rd party...

Imo, the Canon - with its hood is about $40 more than the Sigma - is the better bet. It is slightly behind the Sigma in IQ, BUT has the best AF in its class. It also has a great (read: short) MFD, is built at least as well and more compact/lighter.

I have no experience with the 35 f/2, but it seems to me that it is the bang for the buck value of the 3 lenses.

i'd sell the 17-40L and pick up a 17-55IS instead of getting the 24-105L...or sell the 17-40L and get an UWA to pair with the 24-105L

having a 17-40L,24-105L, and 70-200L seems worse to me than a 10-22mm,24-105mm, 70-200mm, or just a 17-55/70-200mm combo

do you already have a flash for indoor use?

I say 17-55 is more suitable for you. It's wide, it's fast, it has 3-stop IS, and unfortunately, it's cost as much as your 24-105L.

Easy. Sell 17-40L and get a Sigma 17-50OS for ~50$ extra. Twice as fast, sharper, and has IS.

If you want faster still the Sigma 30 is it.

I'd go for the 17-55 over the 24-105 for your zoom. Then add an 85 1.8 as a fast prime to compliment the zoom.

Sp1207 wrote in post #13195215
If you want faster still the Sigma 30 is it.

It is? Why don't you have one?

twoshadows wrote in post #13195370
It is? Why don't you have one?

because the sigma is just for 1.6 crop cameras?

The main reason that I don't want the 17-55 f2.8 is that my dad and I share most of our lenses and he is going FF so I rather buy something that is compatible with FF cameras
(same with the Sigma 30 f1.4) but another reason is that I like the reach of the 24-105 even though it's not the onventional range most want I think it's a better fit for me

I'm still contemplating the 28 F1.8 vs. 35 F2 any thoughts on the two of them