70-300 is fine outdoors, what would you get for indoor school events?

I have a 30D and two lenses, EF-S 17-55 2.8 and EF 70-300 4-5.6. Last week I ran into a situation neither could handle.

I was at my son's orchestra concert in the middle school gym. The 2.8 was fine with that lighting but 55mm was just too short to get good shots and the 70-300 was just not fast enough. So one lens had the aperture but not the reach and the other lens had the reach but not the aperture.

I'm not interested in a 70-200 f2.8 right now, in adequate light I've been very impressed with the IQ and performance of the 70-300, I don't really want another lens for the outdoor situations it can handle.

But for the times when I need a wider aperture and more reach I'm thinking of the 100mm f2.0 or the 135mm f2.0. The 100 has a great price, the 135 has rave reviews and a price approaching a 70-200 f2.8 zoom.

Any opinions? Under the given conditions would you be satisfied with a 100 prime or is the 135 just too good, in spite of the price?

Of course I'm using my current zoom at 100 and 135 to test the lengths. I'm just curious if any one out there has had the same situation and what they decided to do.

At what focal length did you capture most of your shots? Take into consideration you may not always get to sit in the same position you were in.

I used an 85 f/1.8, 135L and a 200L at my grandson's concert last week and any of them would probably work for you. The 200L provided the best closeups, but even the ones taken with the 85 could be cropped and would work OK. I wouldn't worry much about the overlap with your existing lenses. These primes are really in a class by themselves.

Here are a couple of shots taken with the 200 using just available light.

All of my shots that night were at 55mm; flash wasn't practical so the 70-300 was not an option. And I'm trying to solve this very specific situation, indoor lighting in a gymnasium type setting.

You're right, I won't always be at the same distance to my subject so a fast zoom can solve that. But the only options there seem to be the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8. Both are more than $1000 and one is for the most part duplicated by my 17-55 2.8 and the other is unnecessary for me in anything but low light since I'm satisfied with the performance of my existing 70-300 in daylight.

So that seems to leave the fast primes: 85 1.8, 100 2.0 and 135 2.0.

Bob_r, very nice, exactly what I'm looking for, thanks for the examples.

Kent,

You might also check the used market. I bought my 135L used for $700 and the 200L used for $535. The 85 goes for around $300 used.

You're right, in the price range the primes are the choice, and only you can decide what is the best focal length. I've heard only good about all of these primes, so you can be reasonably assured that whichever you pick will serve you well! And primes such as these are well known not only for their speed, but also for their sharpness and IQ. Plus, even though the 70-200 2.8 IS is a fantastic lens, a prime will give you a bit more speed, which, in an indoor setting, could make the difference.

Start with the 135/2 and add the 85 when you realize you need less reach. Together those 2 will cover your needs depending upon where you're sitting and how wide of a shot you want. Then get a used 20D as second body so you don't have to switch lenses in the dark.

Or, spend the same amount of money on the 70-200/2.8IS - which is a spectacular lens in its own right.

timbop wrote in post #4522645
Start with the 135/2 and add the 85 when you realize you need less reach. Together those 2 will cover your needs depending upon where you're sitting and how wide of a shot you want. Then get a used 20D as second body so you don't have to switch lenses in the dark.

Or, spend the same amount of money on the 70-200/2.8IS - which is a spectacular lens in its own right.

I think the 135 would be a good lens to start with too. I took some shots with mine, but it was having a focusing problem so I couldn't post any shots with it.
I had the 70-200 f/2.8, but it isn't an ideal lens for these events. The range is good, but so often there is insufficient light for it. The 135 can be shot wide open at f/2 and that's twice the light of the 2.8. I always carry all 3 primes to these events and at least one will be right for the light and distance.

For indoor events like that, I'd take the 135 f/2 L and the 85 f/1.8. I think the 135 f/2L is a great lens and I don't think you'd be disappointed with it at all. Here are my review on the 135:

http://www.mac-photo.net …ngs/canon135Lre​view.shtml

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. Most of my photos are either at home or outdoors and my current lenses work fine for those situations. Probably less than 5% will be like I first described, indoors but a larger space. I think for now I'll get either the 85 1.8 or the 100 2.0. The 135 will wait for another, more prosperous, day.

I use my 85 f/1.8 when doing indoor school events. I know the venue for my son and have a nice spot to sit in so the range is perfect. I just have not had the need for a longer prime at this time. I would rather save my money for the 70-200 f/2.8 which I know I will use more.

i used my 135L for a stage drama last weekend. it was awesome. i also had a 85/1.8 but i find that a bit too short unless i was able to sit on the first row. for real closeup i added a 1.4x TC to the 135L which gives me f/2.8 at around 190mm.

135 sounds like the choice to me.... you get a great low light lens and it is crazy sharp!

Just echoing whats been said above. I use all three of the prime lenses you mention above for anything kid related indoors. Lots of sports, concerts, plays, fashion shows, special events from pre-school to high school, etc. All are excellent indoor (and out) lenses and much depends on your positioning and what you want to capture.

I find myself gravitating more and more to the 135L (on a 30D). I'm starting to use it for everything indoor as much as is realistically possible. Is it worth the price? For me it's a no-brainer, yes. It was made for indoor low light action and it excels.

If the focal length is too much for you, the 85 1.8 and 100 F2 are outstanding choices.

Good luck.

I still think financially and practically you would be best with the 70-200 2.8 IS... it doesn't overlap your 70-300 at all, these are two very, very different lenses.