What to do for low light

Sigma 30mm

Lexar wrote in post #14900623
If I get the 30 f1.4 won't the DOF be too small? I would need to stop it down to a more reasonable 2 or even 2.8 to be able to capture vacation types of pictures.
So then the f1.4 is not really that relevant any longer??

Please correct me if I am wrong...

depends how far away your subject is...but you really don't have many options if you said you can't use flash...you either open up the lens, and lose some DOF, or use high ISO, or use a tripod for the really slow shutter speeds....tripod wouldn't work for you here i assume...you tried high ISO...you're only option left is a much faster lens...or just leave the camera in the bag

Nickc84 wrote in post #14900681
When you shoot wide open at F1.4 in very low light the DOF changes. Things will be more in focus at 1.4

i think you meant to say 'less in focus'

yea sorry

Both of your questions depend upon and are missing the shutter speeds and focal lengths.

You could go to f/2.8- but it's not going to be the be-all end-all that some make it out to be.
Going to fast primes might help- but then you need to possibly deal with narrower DOF.
You can only push your T2i only so much on ISO.
The only other solutions not mentioned is go get a better body- that can do better in low light. Add in a fast prime with something like a 5D3- and you can go faster and wider- which could give you some breathing room.

rather than trying to stop action- perhaps a little creativity with moving shots/ motion/light blur ? ? ?

Buy a nice prime it is the best option to avoid flash. Zooms won't cut it in low light

ok so a prime seems to be the general consensus. Thanks everyone for your opinions!

Now I was looking at the options and it seems there are 2 primes that would meet my needs in a reasonable price range.
- Sigma 30mm f1.4 (pro: bigger aperture, cons: inconsistent focus and a lot of returns)
- Canon 28mm f1.8 (pro: better quality control and works on ff, cons: smaller aperture and some say softer)

Any experience or recommendations between the 2 choices?

I've been very happy with the Canon 28/1.8 as my go-to for low light situations. It's what I would carry in the situation you describe.

I picked it up after having a similar experience with the 15-85 in the indoor area of Makers Faire earlier this year. Wish I had the 28 then!

Don't forget you have higher iso capabilities. 12,800. I quit caring about the iso and noise, I just want the shot so I take it and do whatever it takes. I'm fixing to sell my 17-50 because I just did a baptism for my niece and was at 2.8 1/80 iso 12,800. ya it was nice to get the shot but would of been nicer to get the Sigma 1.4 and got the the shot at 3200 instead. Plus with 1.4 I can get into even darker situations going up to 12,800 !

Here is a a couple examples at 12,800. first SOOC and second a quick edit in Lightroom 4

Lexar wrote in post #14905704
ok so a prime seems to be the general consensus. Thanks everyone for your opinions!

Now I was looking at the options and it seems there are 2 primes that would meet my needs in a reasonable price range.
- Sigma 30mm f1.4 (pro: bigger aperture, cons: inconsistent focus and a lot of returns)
- Canon 28mm f1.8 (pro: better quality control and works on ff, cons: smaller aperture and some say softer)

Any experience or recommendations between the 2 choices?

Sigma.

I was in extreme low light yesterday with my 85mm f1.8. It kinda worked but I had trouble with motion blur anyway. Settings were F1.8, 1/160, ISO 3200. I know now that I will need at least 1/250 to shoot with the 85mm f1.8 in such low light. A 30mm sigma will indeed help as it is wide and fast.

However I did tried the 15-85mm this morning with the same settings. All the picts were sharper than with the 85mm prime when using 1/30 speed. The IS do the job nicely. I would say that a f4 lens with IS is roughly equivalent to a f1.8 prime.

I think a lot of people overexpose their pictures when shooting low light because the camera try to get a neutral exposure without taking the real outside light into acccount. You need to underexpose your photos by 2-3 stops to get the real night light feeling OR shoot completly manual.

Earwax69 wrote in post #14907324
I was in extreme low light yesterday with my 85mm f1.8. It kinda worked but I had trouble with motion blur anyway. Settings were F1.8, 1/160, ISO 3200.

1/160 is on the slow side, especially on a crop camera. So it doesn't come as a surprise that the image isn't sharp and with blur.

All comes down to what you shoot. IS is completely useless on moving subjects. It's only useful on static objects.

So if you were getting motion blur with the 85mm (which means your subject moves), you are just going to be much worse with the 15-85.

The motion blur was my shaky hands fault, not subject motion. However, of course, 1/30 will not work well if your subject move.

Earwax69 wrote in post #14907324
I was in extreme low light yesterday with my 85mm f1.8. It kinda worked but I had trouble with motion blur anyway. Settings were F1.8, 1/160, ISO 3200.

Extreme is 1.8, 1/125, 12,800 which I've had to do before.

kin2son wrote in post #14907418
1/160 is on the slow side, especially on a crop camera. So it doesn't come as a surprise that the image isn't sharp and with blur.

All comes down to what you shoot. IS is completely useless on moving subjects. It's only useful on static objects.

So if you were getting motion blur with the 85mm (which means your subject moves), you are just going to be much worse with the 15-85.

I am usually comfortable at 1/125 for shutter speed. Most time I will try to double that but usually I'm good for sharp pictures at 1/125.

At that point, you used manual focus? Or you had some highlights to lock your focus on?

Earwax69 wrote in post #14908087
At that point, you used manual focus? Or you had some highlights to lock your focus on?

Never had any issues unless it's a solid color shirt or whatnot. Locks onto faces all the time. well my 85 or sigma doesn't have problems but the tamron won't focus that low for nothing.