# Fast lens for indoor use



## killswitch (Jan 17, 2013)

Looking for a fast lens, mainly for indoor(with low light) use. It will be used in family events, indoor parties at night and its usage will range from single to group portraits. Most of the time I will have external flash attached. Right now I take my 24-70 f2.8L in such events but I am looking for something lightweight and fast. It will be paired with a 5d3 and at times 60d. Oh, I use the 50mm 1.8 II at times and it often hunts for focus in dim lighting conditions where the 24-70 snaps on to the target almost instantly. I am on the verge of selling the 50mm 1.8 II.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## tphillips63 (Jan 17, 2013)

You should look at the 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake and the 35mm f/1.4L and either of the other 35mm f/2.
Just depends on your budget. Also consider whether you like the 35mm or 24mm for indoors shooting or even more towards 50mm.
What do you not like about your current 50?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 17, 2013)

killswitch said:


> Looking for a fast lens, mainly for indoor(with low light) use. It will be used in family events, indoor parties at night and its usage will range from single to group portraits.



In those situations, I almost always reach for my 35mm f/1.4L.


----------



## bjornjd (Jan 17, 2013)

Maybe the Sigma AF 35/1,4 DG HSM ?

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/11/sigma-35mm-f1-4-arrives-announces-new-world-order

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma-35mm-f1-4-dg-hsm


----------



## JerryKnight (Jan 17, 2013)

In rough order of price and less emphasis on exact focal lengths, I consider these to be the "wide guys."

~$500 Canon 28mm/1.8
~$900 Sigma 35mm/1.4 - hard to argue with the reviews and price
~$1300 Canon 35mm/1.4L
~$1400 Canon 16-35mm/2.8L - not as "fast" as the primes, but versatile and fairly light
~$1500 Canon 24mm/1.4L - my favorite wide prime

(I don't keep track of lens revision numbers; just look at the latest versions.)

You can look at the newer lenses I call the "slow primes" like the 24mm/2.8 IS, but I'm skeptical about their usefulness. Being able to hand-hold the shot isn't always the most important thing - sometimes you need wider aperture and faster shutter speeds in low light to prevent subject motion blur. I'm guessing those slower stabilized lenses are better suited for video.



killswitch said:


> Looking for a fast lens, mainly for indoor(with low light) use. It will be used in family events, indoor parties at night and its usage will range from single to group portraits.



My favorite is definitely the 24mm/1.4L, but I don't think it's the best focal length for portraits, except for large groups. 35mm, 50mm, or 85mm works better for individuals. Given your intended usage, I have to agree with the recommendations for the new Sigma 35mm/1.4. It's fast, sharp, affordable, wide on the 5D3, and normal on the 60D.

And definitely sell your thrifty fifty and get its USM brother. Nothing wrong with the 50mm/1.8 but when you start reaching its limits, it's time to upgrade.


----------



## killswitch (Jan 17, 2013)

tphillips63 said:


> You should look at the 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake and the 35mm f/1.4L and either of the other 35mm f/2.
> Just depends on your budget. Also consider whether you like the 35mm or 24mm for indoors shooting or even more towards 50mm.
> What do you not like about your current 50?



I really like the 50mm 1.8 minus the hunting issue it seems to exhibit, as it goes back and forth quite a bit before locking on, it's noisy but that's expected as it does not have USM. But for the price it still is a great lens imho, but I am looking at other options. At times it's hard to squeeze in 4 people in the shot when space limitation is a factor. Would love to see some portraits taken with a 35mil. ^_^


----------



## killswitch (Jan 17, 2013)

JerryKnight said:


> In rough order of price and less emphasis on exact focal lengths, I consider these to be the "wide guys."
> 
> ~$500 Canon 28mm/1.8
> ~$900 Sigma 35mm/1.4 - hard to argue with the reviews and price
> ...



Really helpful JerryKnight, thanks. Hmm, hearing a lot of good things about the new Sigma 35mil. Gonna have to check out some reviews, the only thing that bugged me was the onion bokeh property. I might have confused it with some other lens. Please correct me if I am wrong about the onion bokeh part.


----------



## JerryKnight (Jan 17, 2013)

killswitch said:


> Really helpful JerryKnight, thanks. Hmm, hearing a lot of good things about the new Sigma 35mil. Gonna have to check out some reviews, the only thing that bugged me was the onion bokeh property. I might have confused it with some other lens. Please correct me if I am wrong about the onion bokeh part.



No, it looks like there have been some complaints about it on the Sigma 35mm/1.4, but it's not universal. Many people seem to be okay with its bokeh quality, and I've seen example photos that have decently smooth bokeh. Not sure if it's a problem with some copies of the lens or specific circumstances. Just find as many reviews as you can and maybe rent it from one of the lens rental places.

EDIT: Looks like some cases, it might be related to sharpening, and it only seems to show up with out-of-focus point lights. I'm not sure it's enough to avoid the lens.

EDIT #2: Neuro beat me to it.. It's a specific artifact with point lights, and there are methods to avoid it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 17, 2013)

killswitch said:


> Gonna have to check out some reviews, the only thing that bugged me was the onion bokeh property. I might have confused it with some other lens. Please correct me if I am wrong about the onion bokeh part.



The Canon 35L has enough onions to make me cry.  But they only show up in very rare circumstances (point light sources at a reasonable distance from the focal plane, and usually those light sources are overexposed which masks the pattern).


----------



## agierke (Jan 17, 2013)

> Would love to see some portraits taken with a 35mil. ^_^



granted that these are not indoor shots but here are a few portraits done with the canon 35mm 1.4L all at F2.0.

i generally use the 24-70 F2.8L for indoor use as i usually using for an event where i can incorporate my own lighting mixed with available and i like the convenience of the zoom. typically i need the versatility of the zoom in these situations where the 35mm may prove not to be wide enough. but the 35L is a fantastic lens...i highly recommend it.


----------



## RMC33 (Jan 17, 2013)

I like my 50 1.4 quite a bit. It does not have very many hunting issues with my MKII/III. The one thing about a 50 that I love is WYSIWYG (What you see is what you get) in relation personal FOV vs. Viewfinder FOV. I have yet to use a 35 or 24 but can vouch for the 16-35 as a good group lens.


----------



## dswatson83 (Jan 17, 2013)

I love the 35mm f/1.4 by Sigma. It's not quite light but it is sharp as crap. The problem with other lenses is even though you can shoot at f/1.8 or more, the pictures just are not very sharp. I'm telling you, the Sigma is sharp! There are sharpness results in the review: http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/86-sigma-35mm-f14-review

And a comparison with the Canon 35mm f/1.4 : http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/87-sigma-35mm-f14-vs-canon-35mm-f14

I would prefer a good 50mm for indoor but I just don't love any of them right now. I'm hoping that Sigma puts out an awesome 50 soon based on the new design


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 17, 2013)

Sigma 35mm 1.4 or Canon 24L II

Either would be great.


----------



## Standard (Jan 17, 2013)

> ...Oh, I use the 50mm 1.8 II at times and it often hunts for focus in dim lighting conditions where the 24-70 snaps on to the target almost instantly.



This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus or the way you set up the AF area selection modes with your 5DM3. How are you focusing and what AF selection mode are you using? I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses in lowlight situations, especially with the 24L II or 50L.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 17, 2013)

+1 for the Sigma 1.4. It is an awesome lens, but it is not light weight. The only other lens suitable that I have experience with is the ef28 f/1.8. It's well built, very light considering its focal length and speed, but it's not very sharp at wide apertures and is somewhat lacking in contrast. I almost never use it, but it's so utilitarian, I don't seem to be able to get rid of it. If you can get past the weight, the Siggy would be perfect for your uses...


----------



## Eli (Jan 17, 2013)

Standard said:


> > ...Oh, I use the 50mm 1.8 II at times and it often hunts for focus in dim lighting conditions where the 24-70 snaps on to the target almost instantly.
> 
> 
> 
> This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus or the way you set up the AF area selection modes with your 5DM3. How are you focusing and what AF selection mode are you using? I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses in lowlight situations, especially with the 24L II or 50L.



That's because your lenses aren't the 50mm 1.8 II.


----------



## JerryKnight (Jan 17, 2013)

Standard said:


> > ...Oh, I use the 50mm 1.8 II at times and it often hunts for focus in dim lighting conditions where the 24-70 snaps on to the target almost instantly.
> 
> 
> 
> This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus or the way you set up the AF area selection modes with your 5DM3. How are you focusing and what AF selection mode are you using? I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses in lowlight situations, especially with the 24L II or 50L.



With all due respect, you're nuts if you're comparing two professional >$1500 lenses to a ~$100 lens. Even just comparing autofocus performance, they're not in the same class.

I'm really not bad-mouthing the 50mm/1.8. It's fantastic *for the money*. It's better than 1/15th as good as the L-lenses, but it's still not much of a comparison if price is ignored. When you start to be limited by its shortcomings (including sluggish autofocus) it's time to upgrade, probably to the 50mm/1.4 unless you're planning on the highest level of pro portrait work.


----------



## Mr Bean (Jan 17, 2013)

Until I get a 24 f1.4 (soon'ish), I'm finding the 40mm pancake a beaut lens for indoor work. Its sharp wide open, and focusing (on a 5D m3) has been no issue. Probably the only distraction is its a little noisy to focus, but its cheap


----------



## Standard (Jan 17, 2013)

> With all due respect, you're nuts if you're comparing two professional >$1500 lenses to a ~$100 lens. Even just comparing autofocus performance, they're not in the same class.
> 
> I'm really not bad-mouthing the 50mm/1.8. It's fantastic for the money. It's better than 1/15th as good as the L-lenses, but it's still not much of a comparison if price is ignored. When you start to be limited by its shortcomings (including sluggish autofocus) it's time to upgrade, probably to the 50mm/1.4 unless you're planning on the highest level of pro portrait work.



I am not comparing the 50L to any other Canon 50mm lenses. I know without a doubt the quality of an "L" lens (One reason why I don't bother buying a lower end Canon lens to begin with. Not because I can afford it but because I will bypass any upgrade therefore saving cost in the long run). As so many people have continually bashed the value of the "L" version in the recent review of the 50L, saying how overpriced it is and how good the more affordable 50mm 1.4 is in comparison, I was merely extending the benefit of the doubt to its sibling the 50mm 1.8.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12286.0

As for the question I'd directed at the original poster, I was merely trying to help by first eliminating other possible factors before focusing on the limitation of the equipment. Nothing more than that.


----------



## Eli (Jan 17, 2013)

Standard said:


> > With all due respect, you're nuts if you're comparing two professional >$1500 lenses to a ~$100 lens. Even just comparing autofocus performance, they're not in the same class.
> >
> > I'm really not bad-mouthing the 50mm/1.8. It's fantastic for the money. It's better than 1/15th as good as the L-lenses, but it's still not much of a comparison if price is ignored. When you start to be limited by its shortcomings (including sluggish autofocus) it's time to upgrade, probably to the 50mm/1.4 unless you're planning on the highest level of pro portrait work.
> 
> ...





> This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus or the way you set up the AF area selection modes with your 5DM3. How are you focusing and what AF selection mode are you using? I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses in lowlight situations, especially with the 24L II or 50L.


Honestly, with the wording you've used, the way it's interpreted for me is that you're assuming poor technique before thinking about the limitations of the lens. Instead of opening up with the question, you start with a statement like "This may have *more to do* with the way you shoot and focus.." And then you said "I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses.., especially with the 24L II or 50L.". 
That's like someone saying my Toyota Corolla can't reach speeds of xxx, and then you come in and say well it must be your bad driving because my Ferrari can do that fine.


Also note the OP stated that the focus hunting is only a problem with the 50 1.8, his 24-70 snaps on focus almost instantly, so clearly, not a problem of poor technique.


----------



## Standard (Jan 18, 2013)

> Honestly, with the wording you've used, the way it's interpreted for me is that you're assuming poor technique before thinking about the limitations of the lens. Instead of opening up with the question, you start with a statement like "This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus.." And then you said "I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses.., especially with the 24L II or 50L.".
> That's like someone saying my Toyota Corolla can't reach speeds of xxx, and then you come in and say well it must be your bad driving because my Ferrari can do that fine.
> 
> 
> Also note the OP stated that the focus hunting is only a problem with the 50 1.8, his 24-70 snaps on focus almost instantly, so clearly, not a problem of poor technique.



Alright. My bad. It was never my intention to mean anything negative, especially to killswitch. Apology to you if you thought I meant differently. Should have worded my thought better. Guess I'll shut up and get back to focusing on my own work...


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 18, 2013)

killswitch said:


> Looking for a fast lens, mainly for indoor(with low light) use. It will be used in family events, indoor parties at night and its usage will range from single to group portraits. Most of the time I will have external flash attached. Right now I take my 24-70 f2.8L in such events but I am looking for something lightweight and fast. It will be paired with a 5d3 and at times 60d. Oh, I use the 50mm 1.8 II at times and it often hunts for focus in dim lighting conditions where the 24-70 snaps on to the target almost instantly. I am on the verge of selling the 50mm 1.8 II.
> 
> Thanks in advance.



You can set the camera to continuously hunt for focus.... or just give up. My camera is set to give up if focus can not be found....

I am sitting in a poorly lit room with a 60D, a Sigma 30/1.4, a Canon 50/1.8, and a canon 100L2.8. I have tried this both with selecting the center focus point, and by selecting the far right focus point.

For the 50 F1.8.... focused in a second on about 50 percent of the items, both focus points.
For the 30 F1.4.... focused in about a half to 3/4 of a second on about 3/4 of the items, both focus points.
For the 100 F2.8.. focused on about 90 percent of the items in a quarter of a second with both focus points.

Since it is the same room, same lighting, same camera, same settings, same targets.... I think it is safe to say that the choice of lens does affect autofocus and just like the OP, I had a F2.8 lens outperform a F1.8 lens in low light.


----------



## Zlatko (Jan 18, 2013)

killswitch said:


> Looking for a fast lens, mainly for indoor(with low light) use. It will be used in family events, indoor parties at night and its usage will range from single to group portraits. Most of the time I will have external flash attached. Right now I take my 24-70 f2.8L in such events but I am looking for something lightweight and fast.



Based on your specific requirements, I think:

Canon 24/1.4 is too wide for single portraits
Canon 24/2.8 IS is too wide for single portraits and not fast
Canon 28/1.8 is good but not sharp in corners
Canon 28/2 has buzzy old autofocus
Canon 28/2.8 IS is not a fast lens but works well with flash
Canon 35/2 has buzzy old autofocus
*Canon 35/2 IS (the new one) seems to offer the best combination of focal length, aperture, size, weight & image quality*
Canon 35/1.4 is excellent but big & heavy
Sigma 35/1.4 is excellent but big & heavy 
Canon 40/2.8 is not a fast lens but works well with flash
50mm are not wide enough for some group portraits


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 18, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Sigma 35mm 1.4 or Canon 24L II
> 
> Either would be great.



+1 I have the *24L*, very nice. Had the *35L* once. Both great, just depends on how you shoot. Also, don't rule out a *16-35 f/2.8* zoom. Very handy indoors unless you need the extra stop of the primes. Someone mentioned the *28/1.8 USM*. Love that lens too, it was my first prime, it works great esp on FF and it's affordable.


----------



## RS2021 (Jan 18, 2013)

RustyTheGeek said:


> Someone mentioned the *28/1.8 USM*. Love that lens too, it was my first prime, it works great esp on FF and it's affordable.



+1 on the EF 28mm f/1.8 ....takes flack from some but it is a great fast lens at a reasonable price on FF...highly under-rated.

If you have the funds, then of course 35L is the classic indoors low light lens of choice.


----------



## robbymack (Jan 18, 2013)

Bang for your hard earned buck its tough to beat the 50 1.8 but the 1.4 is a decent upgrade, just don't expect to be blown away. I'd say the ideal choice right now would be the new sigma 35mm if it fits the budget. I also think the 28 1.8 is better on ff than it is on crop. At least that was my experience. I sold mine a few months back because for my use a 2.8 zoom in this range is a better fit.


----------



## killswitch (Jan 18, 2013)

Standard said:


> > Honestly, with the wording you've used, the way it's interpreted for me is that you're assuming poor technique before thinking about the limitations of the lens. Instead of opening up with the question, you start with a statement like "This may have more to do with the way you shoot and focus.." And then you said "I rarely have hunting issues with any of my lenses.., especially with the 24L II or 50L.".
> > That's like someone saying my Toyota Corolla can't reach speeds of xxx, and then you come in and say well it must be your bad driving because my Ferrari can do that fine.
> >
> >
> ...



It's all good. I tried both 50 1.8 and the 24-70L on the same subject, same lighting conditions, focal length for 24-70 was 50mm, made sure the minimum focus distance was met for both the lens, shot in manual mode, used center focus point to lock and in slightly tricky situation (where contrast is a bit low, dim light). The 24-70L fared better in locking on to the subject (no surprise) than the 50 mil.


----------



## killswitch (Jan 18, 2013)

Great suggestions folks. Thanks a lot. So a 35 1.4 seems to be the pick. I think I will also give a 50 1.4 a try. Perhaps rent them out over the weekend.


----------



## bholliman (Jan 18, 2013)

I've found the 35mm focal length on a FF camera to be too wide for most of my indoor photography. Its great for group shots, but unflattering for shots of individuals as you are forced to get close for good framing.

Last weekend I used both my 35L and 50 1.4 on my 6D for pictures at a party and later at a large family event. Despite the 50 1.4 being inferior to the 35L optically, I generally liked the majority of the 50mm shots better, especially of individuals.

I found myself wishing I had an 85, 100 or 135mm prime for better shots of individuals. I'm considering selling my 35L and using the money to apply toward a prime in the 85-135 focal length range to use for shooting indoor events and portraits along with the 50 1.4.


----------

