Canon 85 1.8 vs. Canon 100 2.8 L vs. Canon 135 2.0 L: Which one is best for indoor?

Hello!

I need one more lens for christmas.

I've already Canon EF 35 IS and Canon EF 50 1.8. I shoot with a Canon 6D.

Now my favorites are:

Canon EF 85 1.8
Canon EF 100 2.8 IS L
Canon EF 135 2.0 L

Which one is the best for indoor Shooting the family and kids? Which Autofocus is the fastest? The macro could have a slow autofocus?

What about the bokeh? Is there a huge difference?

Thanks for helping. Need to order it today, to geht it until christmas.


Bjoern

Heya,

Indoor... kids...

Those are long focal lengths for that. Your 35mm F2 IS is better for indoor & kids.

Since you're shooting with the 6D, throw ISO up to 3200~6400, use any lens, pick a focal length that best suits what you're doing, and fire away. I would be concerned that 85+mm ranges are too long for this. I do the same thing myself, and 85mm is the limit indoors for me, I have to be across the room practically for the right composition when I'm framing up. So that means 135mm for you, would probably do similar, unless you live in a huge open house and you like being 6~10 feet away from the subject, and they fill the frame nearly. I was doing this with a newborn, let alone older children.

I use my 35mm F2 IS more indoors because it's just so much better for framing up and it is really sharp at F2 and has IS.

Very best,

I used to have the 85mm and currently have the 135mm and the 100mm 2.8 L. The 135mm for portraits can' t be beat. But it's the most expensive of the 3. I think you are leaving out 2 lenses that should also be considered. The 100mm 2.8 NON-IS macro has exactly the same image quality as the L version. You lose out on the IS, but the lens is much less expensive. However, if you like bokeh, you should also consider the 100mm f2. Of all the lenses mentioned here, only the 135mm has nicer bokeh. If it isn't a must to get a macro lens, the 100mm f2 would be exceptional for indoor shooting due to the f2. It also doesn't have the CA issue wide open that the 85mm 1.8 has.

Unless the rooms are huge the 85mm, and that might be to long for some rooms.

I like the 135L better when there is room.

I shoot sports using the 85 f/1.8 and 135L. I tried a macro lens a time or too but AF was too slow to keep up with the action.

When micro-focus adjusted correctly, the 85 and 135 can produce stunning images. Both are fast and accurate AF machines. The 85 has a touch of chromatic aberration (CA) that can degrade the image just a bit. The 135 tends to produce better images simply due to the longer focal length producing smoother background blur. Indoors, the 135L may be a bit too tight unless you want head & shoulder shots from across the room.

You have listed only primes in the tele range, never considered a 70-200/2.8 type zoom?
Apparently you are looking for a lens to shoot not a group, but a single person?
At X-mas with candle-lit rooms get the fastest glass you can afford so I woul suggest to have a look at the sigma 85/1.4 wich fits your FL selection criterium and is about the price of a 100L but is a stop faster than the 85/1.8 and the 135L and two stops faster than the 100L.

A flash that can bounce light off the ceiling is what I would get next. If it has to be a lens, get the 24-70mm f2.8. You will be able to capture kids playing around while you sit comfortably on a chair.

I use the 85mm indoors for my kids. Its a great lens. Autofocus is a bit slow but I do get a ton of keepers. I would think any thing longer is going to be too much unless you have a huge living space.

I would start with upgrading the Canon EF 50 1.8 to a EF 50 1.4.
After that I would probably get the EF 100 2.8L IS. It is a fast lens as well.

Frank H wrote in post #16546693
I use the 85mm indoors for my kids. Its a great lens. Autofocus is a bit slow but I do get a ton of keepers. I would think any thing longer is going to be too much unless you have a huge living space.

Wow, I never considered my 85mm slow. Even when it was on my Xti!


hennie's suggestion of the Sigma 85 is also excellent suggestion. It gives a 2/3 improvement in aperture over the Canon f/1.8, only downside is it focuses slower.

If you don't have a flash, I agree with snake0ape. IMO a flash that can be moved off camera is almost essential.

For indoors, I would go with 35 or 50. 85 > is a bit too long.

Sigma 35 f/1.4
Canon 35L f/1.4
Canon 50L f/1.2

But out of three of your choices, I'd go with 85 f/1.8

For indoor portrait on a FF body like 6D, 85 1.8 will cover the normal range. 135 a little too long for my taste.

When I only had a crop body, I sometimes used 85 on it. Its AF is fast, but just a little too long. In many cases I could not cover the whole body.

135L is an excellent glass.

Thanks for your answers.

I have ordered yesterday a Canon EF 135 L. I hope it's not to long for the living rooms. Will check it tomorrow on christmas eve.

If it's too long for indoor shooting, I'll check the EF 100 2.0 or EF 100 2.8. Sametimes I shoot no moving things and here the stabilization will be fine.

I hate to say it, but it's going to be way too long for your living room...

shedberg wrote in post #16548381
I hate to say it, but it's going to be way too long for your living room...

+1

Way too long for anything except headshot.