Need lens advice

I have a 25-105L for my 5d mk II. I want to buy the EF70-200MM 2.8L IS II. I'm beginning to get into people photography and it's mostly indoors. I'm thinking about trading in my 24-105 and getting the 70-200 II. You think I'd benefit the lens switch?

mike3767 wrote in post #15191825
You think I'd benefit the lens switch?

um no?

Why would you want a tele for indoor??

Pick the right lens with the right length for the job, not because you heard that the lens is sharp and has a faster aperture than your 24-105.

I'd be hesitant with only having a 70-200 if I mainly shot indoors. Granted, if it is a large space, the 70-200 is very nice on a FF body. But in a smaller space, like the average room of a home, the 70-200 will be very limiting. Especially when you can no longer back up because there is a wall behind you.

If you get the 70-200, you could also spring $250 extra and grab a 35 f2 to cover the short end.

Start with an 85 1.8 and see how you like it. There are benefits to longer lenses for portraiture, but you have some limitations inside with focal length and max aperture.

Can you explain how someone with your gear list is asking such a question. Your gear list would seem to indicate to me that you know a bit more about lenses than your question suggests. I am just having trouble reconciling in my mind a photographer with your gear with the question that was put.

RAW, I'd gladly explain. It's because I have money to blow! I do real estate photography part time and am very busy with that. It's not my full time job so any money I make with real estate photography, I blow on camera equipment. Like I said, I'm just getting into taking people pics and am trying to figure this whole new area out. I'm not happy with the 24-105 inside. I take candids for a bunch of women that have weekly meetings. I have flash but it seems that when I take group photos, the center is nicely light but the edges are dark so I was thinking this is where I'd benefit with the 70-200.

mike3767 wrote in post #15192577
RAW, I'd gladly explain. It's because I have money to blow! I do real estate photography part time and am very busy with that. It's not my full time job so any money I make with real estate photography, I blow on camera equipment. Like I said, I'm just getting into taking people pics and am trying to figure this whole new area out. I'm not happy with the 24-105 inside. I take candids for a bunch of women that have weekly meetings. I have flash but it seems that when I take group photos, the center is nicely light but the edges are dark so I was thinking this is where I'd benefit with the 70-200.

Mike, sadly the problem with taking pictures inside of people is that in order to NOT use flash, you have to either bump up your ISO or(sometimes and) lower your fstop. Your camera should allow you to use 3200 ISO easily, you might even be happy with 6400 ISO. However, while a fast lens with a wide aperture will allow you to expose properly indoors, you're going to have shallow depth of field with these candids. This might work out well for you, but you could end up with things out of focus due to shallow depth of field that you would want in focus. If I were you I would look up "bouncing flash" and start practicing with that.

I think that better use of flash will solve your problem rather than buying a new lens.

Indoors the 24-105 fails hard. At f4 I will avoid it. Go with primes or at least a 24-70 f/2.8. If you want more reach then get a 70-200 f/2.8 but definitely go with the fast aperture lenses. Even f/2.8 is a little slow (I hate high ISO). I recommend primes more.

Thanks for the explanation. May I suggest that you go to a competent photographer or photography club and see if you can get some tuition on using your flash with your 24-105. I have not used it but I know that the 24-105 is a great lens. I assume you have a 580 flash, operated properly there is no reason for you to have uneven lighting. I have a 16-35mm lens and manage even lighting with that at 16mm. If I am guessing correctly, also get some pointers for use of you tilt shift lens too, that is a stunning real estate lens when you get the hang of it.
Cheers, Raw

In the rare instances where I do some studio work, I use the 70-200 a lot. I also use it a lot indoors for weddings and receptions. But then I have a second camera with a wider lens as well. They both have their uses. The 70-200 does absolutely shine as a portrait lens though. If you can afford to just simply buy it then go ahead. Keep the 24-105.

mike3767 wrote in post #15192577
RAW, I'd gladly explain. It's because I have money to blow! I do real estate photography part time and am very busy with that. It's not my full time job so any money I make with real estate photography, I blow on camera equipment. Like I said, I'm just getting into taking people pics and am trying to figure this whole new area out. I'm not happy with the 24-105 inside. I take candids for a bunch of women that have weekly meetings. I have flash but it seems that when I take group photos, the center is nicely light but the edges are dark so I was thinking this is where I'd benefit with the 70-200.

Mike, As others have suggested work on improving your flash technique because while a faster lens will provide you enough light, it often isnt good light. By bumping the ISO and using some bounce techniques you may find you like the flash results.

Here is what I was talking about. I bought a flash bouncer from garyfong.com and was hoping that would take care of it but I don't think it did. After looking more into lens options, I might look at the 24-70.

mike3767 wrote in post #15194409
Here is what I was talking about. I bought a flash bouncer from garyfong.com and was hoping that would take care of it but I don't think it did. After looking more into lens options, I might look at the 24-70.

The fong stuff is awful. It really doesnt do most of the things you think. That said with the ladies angled away from you no flash would provide even coverage because of the falloff that results from distance. You cant cheat physics.

Depending on how dark that room is and what your ISO is that picture would benefit a lot from a prime such as a 35L. If people are not moving fast then you don't need a high shutter speed and a large aperture prime is great.

I have a crop and bought a sigma 30 f1.4 for exactly those types of occasions.
I just took indoor wedding pictures and the 30 f1.4 was amazing for taking shots with no flash.
However when the room is dark and there is fast motion I also realized that primes have limitations and started using flash, which worked out very well.