Advice for a new lens

[MarkS]

Hey guys, I need some advice for a second lens. I currently shoot a Canon 6D with the 24-105 f4. I love the camera and the lens, except that I am finding I am shooting more and more people indoors, low lighting situations when I don't necessarily want the flash on. I would really like a lens with which I can shoot more wide open. I still do shoot a variety of subjects and situations.

I am considering either purchasing a 50 or 85mm f1.2 (and keeping the 24-105), or swapping the 24-105 f4 for the 24-70 II f2.8

I have heard great things about all three lens, and it seems the 24-70 is an upgrade to the 24-105, while I do lose some range, that isn't an issue for me. But I do question whether or not the f2.8 is really wide enough...

I'd love to hear your guys' thoughts on the lenses, and what you would do.

Thanks,
Mark

[William W]

. . .I currently shoot a Canon 6D with the 24-105 f4. I love the camera and the lens, except that I am finding I am shooting more and more people indoors, low lighting situations when I don't necessarily want the flash on. I would really like a lens with which I can shoot more wide open. I still do shoot a variety of subjects and situations.

I am considering either purchasing a 50 or 85mm f1.2 (and keeping the 24-105), or swapping the 24-105 f4 for the 24-70 II f2.8

I have heard great things about all three lens, and it seems the 24-70 is an upgrade to the 24-105, while I do lose some range, that isn't an issue for me. But I do question whether or not the f2.8 is really wide enough...

I'd love to hear your guys' thoughts on the lenses, and what you would do.

Thanks,
Mark

My thoughts for the shooting scenario that you outline:

1. Almost pointless swapping the 24 to 105/4IS for 24 to 70/2.8 and allow the loss of IS for the sake of the gain of one stop of Shutter Speed at any given ISO.

If the EV is so low inside that you need to crib on the Shutter Speed, then three or four stops Image Stabilization will nearly always be more of an advantage for you than the one stop of shutter speed allowed by the extra stop of aperture: especially so if you are framing the portrait tightly and/or if you are using Focal Lengths at or longer than 50mm.

Put another way, part of my arguement is: If the Subject is moving fast enough such that F/4 will NOT arrest the Motion Blur then, it is only RARE circumstances that ONE STOP of Shutter Speed gain will be enough to arrest that Subject Motion Blur . . . most often one needs two or three stops of Shutter Speed gain to ensure that.

***

2. The next matter is the consideration of the best/most useful/most adaptable Focal Length for shooting, indoors, low level available light portraiture.

In this regard the wider the lens the more adaptable it will be, obviously, because for any given shooting distance one has more framing options. That is to say, once you are up against the wall in a small room, you can't back-back any farther and therefore you are committed to the framing that you have – and that might be a tight shot, when you want an half shot or a full length shot.

On the other hand, if you want a tighter shot – AND - if you are shooting with a wider lens then you can always frame a bit wider to ensure the perspective/subject distance that you want and crop tighter in post production.

Therefore, considering the above, what I would do in your position and if I only had one lens to choose is would buy the EF35/1.4L, which allows three stops of shutter speed gain for any given ISO and has a wide enough Focal Length to be very versatile for shooting Portraiture indoors, even in cramped conditions.

If there are options to buy more than one lens, then I’d buy the 35/1.4L; 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 – these three lenses IMO are the best value for money set of Canon Lenses for the shooting scenario that you outline when using a “Full Frame” camera.

For reference I have all the lenses mentioned above (my 24 to 70/2.8 is the original) and my niche is shooting low level available light portraiture. Rarely would I ever use a zoom lens for that purpose. There are other reasons – size, weight, balance and the ability to shoot without the viewfinder are the main other considerations for using a Prime Lens for this particular shooting scenario.

I use 5D Series Cameras.

The 35 I’d typically use at F/2 and the 50 at f/2.2 and the 85 at F/2.

I have used the 85/1.2L, but not the 85/1.2L MkII - and if you are buying one, then, based upon advice I trust, it is the MkII that you should consider.

The 50/1.2L is big and is very nice glass, but for the extra 1/3 stop (compared to the 50/1.4) not worth it for me: YMMV.

*

My best advice is –

Before you buy anything just see how low level the EV actually is, in the shooting situations because the 6D can be bumped t quite high ISO: the trick is NOT to UNDEREXPOSE

WW

[Polar01]

Mark I believe that the D6 is a 2 year old camera and as such should have no problem if you were to increase ISO. What you did not tell us is what ISO settings you are using in these low light situations. That camera should be able to be bumped up the ISO quite a bit without problems. When you get into lens that are in the f/1.2, f/1.4 range even f/2.8 it the knife edge DOF that you get with 50mm and up. You do not get as much of a problem with DOF when you get into wide angle lens, however by the time you get near 28mm you start to lose that DOF rapidly. Really try to find out what the ISO limit and your limit is before going into new lens will solve my problems. New lens may make a whole lot of different problems.

Cheers: Allan

Agree with you all the way William

[MarkS]

Mark I believe that the D6 is a 2 year old camera and as such should have no problem if you were to increase ISO. What you did not tell us is what ISO settings you are using in these low light situations. That camera should be able to be bumped up the ISO quite a bit without problems. When you get into lens that are in the f/1.2, f/1.4 range even f/2.8 it the knife edge DOF that you get with 50mm and up. You do not get as much of a problem with DOF when you get into wide angle lens, however by the time you get near 28mm you start to lose that DOF rapidly. Really try to find out what the ISO limit and your limit is before going into new lens will solve my problems. New lens may make a whole lot of different problems.

Cheers: Allan

Agree with you all the way William

Thanks William and Allan, you both make some great points. Looking back at some recent photos, the ISO was up to 16000-20000 (f4, 1/60 - 1/120 or so) and the photos were very grainy. I was pretty much as slow as I could go, and as wide open as I could obviously. I realize the DoF argument, but maybe I am not taking this into account as much as you suggested...thanks.

[William W]

Of all my EOS lenses, for the shooting scenario that you outline, I would use the 35/1.4 the most.

In fact, I bought a Fuji x100s for this specific shooting purpose, and that is a consideration that you might also entertain.

But, in the meantime, these samples might assist you, taken in Low to Very Low Light Levels, Available Light Portraiture:

The 24/1.4 (at F/2.2)

“Drinks with Friend”
*
The 35/1.4 (at F/2.2)

“Street Mimes”
*
The 50/1.4 (at F/1.6)

“Bride's Maid”
*
The 85/1.8 (at F/1.8)

“Woman at Window”
*
The 135/2 (at F/2)

“The Lamp Post will not divide Us”
*
The 24 to 105F/4L IS, to show the value of IS (i.e. little or no residual Subject Motion Blur from the ambient exposure in shadows) the shot was pulled at: 1/5s

“Selfies”


WW

[William W]

Thanks William and Allan, you both make some great points. Looking back at some recent photos, the ISO was up to 16000-20000 (f4, 1/60 - 1/120 or so) and the photos were very grainy. I was pretty much as slow as I could go, and as wide open as I could obviously. I realize the DoF argument, but maybe I am not taking this into account as much as you suggested...thanks.

Typically - ISO 20,000 @ 1/100s @ F/4: That’s around EV = 5 if my metal arithmetic is accurate. That’s a quite dark indoor situation, that’s typical of ‘club lighting’: the “Bride’s Maid” (above) was pulled at F/1.6 @ 1/50th @ ISO3200, which is about EV = 4.

Re grain – (noise) - three very important considerations:

1. I cannot emphasis too much that you cannot afford to underexpose when using High ISO, not even ½ Stop of underexposure should be tolerated.

2. Also Noise is more apparent on the screen than in the print.

3. Also adequate and correct Post Production is important.

*

Re portraiture in typical light levels of EV 4~5 – I really do think that you must seriously consider a very fast prime lens or two, even if you do have a reasonably good quality ISO 64,000 to use - and on a 6D you should be able to push to ISO 64,000.

Re the DoF issue - (and it is a reality) if you do get a very fast prime and you choose to use it at very large apertures on a 6D - then you just need to learn how to manage that very skinny DoF and/or manipulate the shooting situation to get a larger DoF - which are a just another two new skills to add to your barrel.

WW

[Shadowman]

The f/2.8 might be wide enough but you'll still need to use high ISO especially if your subject is moving unless you can live with some motion blur of your subjects.

[Adrian]

We have a 6D that we use as one of our office cameras. I also have all of the lenses you mention.

In your shoes I would buy the 50mm f1.4, which I use a huge amount indoors for portrait work where space is limited. It is a great deal cheaper than the f1.2L and in most cases equally as good. f1.2 gives you very shallow depth of field. The 6D can handle ambient light at ISA up to around 2000 perfectly well and this is going to deal with moist scenarios. You would probably be wise to invest in a speedlight (which the 6D can control remotely as well as on camera), which will help you control light indoors (bouncing off walls and ceilings).

The 85mm f1.2 is super lens, but again wide open depth of field is very thin. It is also a heavy and chunky lens, and takes some getting used to to focus manually. Bill is dead right, the non L version of the 85mm is great value and actually much easier to use.

Forget the 24-70 f2.8L. There is no massive advantage over the F4 24-105 that you have. What I would consider, for indoor use, is the 16-35 f2.8L which I use indoors and very often as a walk around lens for street shooting. It is much lighter than the 24-70 and as you already have that focal length covered, if you are operating with an "L" budget that wide angle (6D is full frame obviously so you get the benefit fully) is a great lens to have in your arsenal. Really useful indoors for group shots etc.

Kind regards

Adrian

[Shadowman]

Of all my EOS lenses, for the shooting scenario that you outline, I would use the 35/1.4 the most.

In fact, I bought a Fuji x100s for this specific shooting purpose, and that is a consideration that you might also entertain.

But, in the meantime, these samples might assist you, taken in Low to Very Low Light Levels, Available Light Portraiture:

The 24/1.4 (at F/2.2)

“Drinks with Friend”
*
The 35/1.4 (at F/2.2)

“Street Mimes”
*
The 50/1.4 (at F/1.6)

“Bride's Maid”
*
The 85/1.8 (at F/1.8)

“Woman at Window”
*
The 135/2 (at F/2)

“The Lamp Post will not divide Us”
*
The 24 to 105F/4L IS, to show the value of IS (i.e. little or no residual Subject Motion Blur from the ambient exposure in shadows) the shot was pulled at: 1/5s

“Selfies”


WW

Nice examples.

[rpcrowe]

I am surprised that Colin has not weighed in on this one...

I realize that you have mentioned "low lighting situations when I don't necessarily want the flash on"

Perhaps I am interpreting your statement incorrectly but, it seems that you might be talking about the built-in (pop-up) flash. IMO, the only good reason for having this flash is to trigger off camera flashes...

However a viable solution to your low light problem is to use a hotshoe flash with a diffuser reflector such as the Joe Demb Flash Diffuser Pro http://www.dembflashproducts.com/pro...lash-diffuser/ even better would be to use the diffused hotshoe flash on a camera flip bracket such as the Stroboframe. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stroboframe-...item486d972818

The bracket will cost about $25 or so U.S. Dollars and the Flash Diffuser Pro will cost about $45... As far as a hotshoe flash, IMO all photographers should have one of these in their kit and should know how to use it.

Flash doesn't need to look like a deer caught in the headlights...





Many photographers who refuse to use flash don't know how to use flash creatively or even adequately. There are some good tips on the Joe Demb website as well as on http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-pho...hy-techniques/

[Shadowman]

Many photographers who refuse to use flash don't know how to use flash creatively or even adequately. There are some good tips on the Joe Demb website as well as on http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-pho...hy-techniques/

Richard,

I remember those images of yours very well, thanks for the link. I'm always debating whether or not to use flash; I mostly decide not to as my images are more candid than posed.

[inkista]

35/2 IS, 50/1.4 USM, or 85/1.8 USM are all moderately priced primes that could work for you. There's really no need to hit the f/1.2Ls or the 35L--as magnificent as it undoubtedly is--particularly if you want to shoot candids without a great honking hunk of glass intimidating the hell out of your subjects across the table. I've had people duck when I point the 24-105L their way.

Of course, for me, across-the-table shots are generally done with my GX-7 and pancake Panasonic 20/1.7, so I tend to slap the EF 40/2.8 STM on my 5DMkII for this type of stuff.

[William W]

. . . There's really no need to hit . . . the 35L--as magnificent as it undoubtedly is--particularly if you want to shoot candids without a great honking hunk of glass intimidating the hell out of your subjects across the table. . .

Alliteration.
Love it.

*

35/2 IS. I didn't think of that little bugger. I have the 35/2. It is less intimidating than the 35L. The IS would be a bonus and the IQ is better on the 35/2 IS than the 35/2, I expect.


*

Thank you, John.

WW

[MarkS]

Thanks again for all the advice here. Once again this forum does not disappoint. I have a lot to think about and still to learn (always) but will update you with what happens.

Thanks

[PhotoByTrace]

If considering the 35mm or 50mm f/1.4s, it may also be worth taking a look at the new Art range from Sigma.

I almost feel like I should duck for cover when I utter those words... I even find myself bracing a little bit. However, the suggestion comes from my own enlightenment to the performance of these lenses very recently. They made me eat a little humble pie if I'm truthful.

I was talked into trying the 50mm and was absolutely astonished at the sharpness wide open and autofocus performance in low light. There was little vignetting and the bokeh was also very pleasant. That led to me seeking out the 35mm... I was equally impressed and surprised. They aren't inexpensive lenses, nor small, nor lightweight... indeed the 50mm probably qualifies as a huge honking hunk of glass But I now believe the performance is better than my Nikkor. And yes, I know you are talking Canon here, which I have no experience with... but I still suggest having a look at them if a prime is your inclination.

[inkista]

Yeah, the "Sigmaluxes" (30/1.4 [if you're on crop], 35/1.4, 50/1.4, and 85/1.4) all have outstanding optical reputations. Where they tend to take a little heat is on autofocus performance.

[Doorstop]

In your shoes I would buy the 50mm f1.4,...

Adrian

ditto on that.

Plus

I would never ever never want to sell my 24-105...