Low light lens advice

[Steven23]

the 28 1.8 isnt that bad, less than 500 bucks, might be the focal length you want that is faster than 2.8, i myself have not use other glass besides canon not for sure about sigma or tamron.

[JJphoto]

I use 35mm1.4 on my 7D for indoor shots, I like it very much, but to be honest, F 1.4 is not fast enough in some lighting like candle light and can

[clemmb]

When you were using the 17-50 do you know what focal length you shot the most? That will help you choose between 35, 24, etc..


Mark

[thekingb]

Most of my 17-50 shots were at 24mm or above. I

[neuroanatomist]

I haven't used a lens in that focal range that's faster than f/2.8, but I agree that f/2.8 is often not adequate indoors for stopping movement (even with posed subjects, at least 1/30 s is usually needed, 1/60 s is better). On my 7D at f/2.8, that requires ISO 3200; for static subjects (i.e. not people), the IS on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS allows shake-free images at reasonable ISO settings, at the cost of a slow shutter (e.g. 1/10 s or less).


With my EF 85mm f/1.2<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II, an aperture of f/1.4 with the indoor lighting in my house at night is sufficient for 1/60 s shutter speed with around ISO 800. But, keep in mind the trade-off in terms of depth of field. For example, if you shoot at 35mm and f/1.4 on a 7D with a subject distance of 8 feet (reasonable for that focal length indoors), your DoF will be around 10" - enough to get a face in focus, but likely too thin for a group shot. So, flash is often needed anyway! Do you have an external Speedlite (430EX II, 580EX II, etc.)? If you are relying on your pop-up flash, I can certainly understand your reluctance to use it. But, a shoe-mounted flash bounced off the ceiling (or located off-camera, diffused with a softbox, and triggered wirelessly from your 7D!) provides much better and more flattering light.

[wickerprints]

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.

[piiooo]

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.

[Kayaker72]

Hi King,


Welcome back!


I

[HDNitehawk]

I guess the 35L is the easy choice if money were no object?

That would be the one, or its sister lens the 24L f1.4.


Or just decide you will use a flash and go a diffrent route and save some $

[Keith B]

When a 40D was my only camera I really enjoyed shooting with a 24 1.4. You could probably find a used one for somewhere around $800 (maybe less).