Low light lens advice

The problem with buying an L lens, IMO, is that you're paying a big premium for an image circle that you're not fully utilizing. So, unless you plan on upgrading to a 5D-series or 1D-series body at some point in the next few years, you're spending money on glass that would probably be better spent on that body upgrade.


Yes, many L lenses are very sharp compared to their non-L counterparts, and that's a legitimate reason for buying them regardless of what you're putting behind it. And if you buy a cheaper, non-L EF lens, you're still paying for that bigger image circle. But the L glass is most often distinguished from the non-L lenses not by how well they perform in the center, but how they do in the periphery--precisely the area that an APS-C sensor doesn't see.


So why not buy EF-S? Because there are virtually no options for fast aperture EF-S lenses. To date, Canon does not make an EF-S lens faster than f/2.8.


As a result, I think you have essentially three choices:

1. Third-party crop lenses (e.g., Sigma 30/1.4)
2. Canon EF non-L lenses (e.g., EF 28/1.8)
3. Canon L primes (e.g., EF 24/1.4L, 35/1.4L)

Of the three above, I'd say the 28/1.8 has the worst image quality--and it is also obviously the slowest. The Sigma won't work on a full-frame body; and the L glass will make you poor but happy.


Actually, there is one more choice: The EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS. It's around 2 stops slower, but you get IS as partial compensation. For still or slow-moving subjects, it would work just as well as having an f/1.4 lens, but it will not be adequate for moderate action in low light. But its distinct advantage is that it gives you an ideal focal length range at an aperture that is still relatively fast. You can't get 17mm @ f/2.8 otherwise, without spending a LOT more money.

Recently, Sigma came out with a 17-50 2.8 HSM OS, which looks really competitively on tests and costs 75% of the equivalent Canon. I think it is worth looking into.

Hi King,


Welcome back!


I

Lots of great advice already. Nikon has had a crop-only 35mm f/1.8 for $200 for a while now with good image qualtiy. Hopefully Canon will release an EF-S 35mm f/1.8 to match it someday, I think it would pretty well for you. In the mean time, I think the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is a great choice; Autofocus Micro-Adjust will help if you get one that

Some nature photographers has reported that the IS of their long lenses are not very reliable, I seems feel the same way on my 300mm 2.8IS, sometimes it works very well sometimes it doesn

If you don

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thekingb

Here's my issue. I have a 7D... That leaves me with the EF 85 f1.8 and the EF 70-200 f4. The long, indoor shooting season is upon me, and the 85 is too long. I used to have the 50 f1.4 but found it too long on my 7D in many cases.


What should I get? I find f2.8 to be inadequate for some indoor work without a flash, so I'm thinking prime (although I have had good results with the Tamron).


I could be convinced to spent over $1000, but I'm not thrilled about it.


Brian

---

How about a used 5DI for $1000 with a 50/1.4


Rich

I actually have a speedlite 430ex II, which I use occasionally. But stopping motion at f2.8 and the speedlite often requires me to set the high speed sync to 1/250, which in turn tends to light up the foreground just fine but makes the background dark. I wonder what it would be like at f2 or f1.8. I guess i could try it on my 85 f1.8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thekingb

I actually have a speedlite 430ex II, which I use occasionally. But stopping motion at f2.8 and the speedlite often requires me to set the high speed sync to 1/250, which in turn tends to light up the foreground just fine but makes the background dark. I wonder what it would be like at f2 or f1.8. I guess i could try it on my 85 f1.8.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

You did ask for the best bang for the buck, since that one would be $0 it would be the best bang for the buck.


On the opposite end (best lens if $ were not an issue) imo would be the 35mm F1.4L at $1370.00.


I am not sure about all the non canon brand lens everyone was recomending, but if I had lost the lens I was using (17-50mm) in that range, I would be looking for the best IQ from a lens in that class, with speedas asecondaryconsideration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJphoto

so what you guys will say about your lenses with IS? does it work all the time?

---

Hi JJ....I think IS on my EFS 15-85 works great andlikely "all the time."I'd say my "keeper rate" starts to decline around 1/10s for hand held shots, whichis about right for4 stop IS and approximately85 mm on a 7D. While definitely not as good (2 stop IS),the IS on my100-400Lseems to consistently workas well.


[EDIT]...just looked at some photos and I also have hand held pictures taken at 1/2 s at 15 mm, which again, is about right for 4 stop IS on a 7D with a EFS 15-85.