85 1.8 vs. 70-200 2.8 IS in low light

I rented a 70-200 2.8 IS for the weekend to shoot a Confirmation service at our Parish this weekend. During rehearsal I practiced with it as well as my 85 1.8. Here are some examples of both lenses:

100mm, f2.8 1/80 ISO 8000

On my calibrated display, the shot from the 85mm looks better. If the 85 gives you enough reach, I'd shoot with that.

adamo99 wrote in post #16779729
On my calibrated display, the shot from the 85mm looks better. If the 85 gives you enough reach, I'd shoot with that.

Thank you

Heya,

The 70-200 at F2.8 is going to be fine, just use higher ISO's. It's very clean so long as exposure is correct. Your first image, to me, is a bit under exposed. But even then, the ISO didn't negatively impact the image. I would have stopped the 85mm down to F2 at least, if not maybe F2.8, just to get a better depth of field to capture more while still keeping the background blurred out.

For what you're doing, the 70-200 F2.8 would be the choice I would take, simply because it allows faster composition options and versatility instead of having to move a lot with the prime. Also, the 70-200 at F2.8 with IS is going to be fine, even at low shutter speeds, again, just pump ISO. You're not even at the threshold of your camera yet with ISO seeing how clean these are at those ISO values, and the contrast/color/focus was nice on your first image with that lens. Had you pumped ISO by one more stop, it would have been fantastic.

Very best,

The 85 gets a bit better at f2 than 1.8 at least on my copy. Plus 1/80, 2.0 ISO 4000 would give the same exposure as 1/80, 2.8 ISO 8000. I don't like to go below 1/80" when shooting people even with IS because of subject motion blur risk.

I'd stick to the 85mm as long as you can compose nicely with that focal length. There is no substitute for wider glass in dark situations when there are moving things in your images.