Need recommendations for Lenses

[srisaro]

I am a 350D user. I currently use a EF 70-200 F4L for outdoor shots. However, when I try to use it for indoor functions and parties, I find it difficult to manage for some decent shots.

My question is that would a EF 135 F2L be helpful. Also does it make sense for indoor and outdoor photography. Pros and cons are welcome.

I also thought ablut EF 100 F2.8 Macro for Macro Photography. kindly help to decide.

 

[mpenza]

depends on what u want to shoot i guess. for indoor non-stage events, i usually shoot with a wider lens (more cramped and usually the need to interact with subjects), so a 70-200, 100 or 135 would not be useful for me. for indoor stage events like fashion shows, i usually shoot with the 70-200F4L with external flash if the lighting is inadequate.

 

[sk.images]

135 on the 350D would be too long for indoors event use. You would be better served getting a 24-70L. If you really want primes then get the 35L and the 50/1.4 or 1.8 combination.

 

[An drew]

Good lenses to use indoor are usually the faster lenses:
35mm (2, 1.4)
50mm (1.8, 1.4)
85mm (1.8, 1.2)
135mm (2.0)
300mm (2.8)
70-200 (2.8 IS)
24-70 (2.8)

The correct focal length depends on how far you are and what results you want. I have used the 135 and 300 indoors (performances not allowing flash) with great results. These two lenses can be used wide-open for sharp results, unlike some of my other "fast" lenses.

If the focal length is right for you I would definitely recommend the 135. From my limited experience with my 100mm Macro, I would not recommend that it be used for low light distance shots. It is of course a great macro lens.

Good luck.

 

[mpenza]

From my limited experience with my 100mm Macro, I would not recommend that it be used for low light distance shots. It is of course a great macro lens.

Could I ask why? Focussing is very fast outside of macro distances for the 100/2.8 Macro USM.

 

[Goldenstars08]

You can try the EF 70-200 F/2.8 L (IS or non IS).
Good for in door event even without flash.

 

[satay16]

from what i have experienced in school, the EF 17-40 F4L USM is DEFINATELY the only lens you will ever need to shoot indoors.

 

[Belle&Sebastain]

from what i have experienced in school, the EF 17-40 F4L USM is DEFINATELY the only lens you will ever need to shoot indoors.

its a slower lens and painful for situtions with lower than you can imagine lighting.

 

[Canonised]

I am a 350D user. I currently use a EF 70-200 F4L for outdoor shots. However, when I try to use it for indoor functions and parties, I find it difficult to manage for some decent shots.

My question is that would a EF 135 F2L be helpful. Also does it make sense for indoor and outdoor photography. Pros and cons are welcome.

I also thought ablut EF 100 F2.8 Macro for Macro Photography. kindly help to decide.

For indoor or outdoor, this is, to me at least, the indispensible one >>> ef50mm f1.8 :thumbsup:
though it is not the most popular, or the best, or the cheapest, i think everyone need to keep one .... just like a faithful wife..... :sweatsm:

 

[An drew]

Could I ask why? Focussing is very fast outside of macro distances for the 100/2.8 Macro USM.

Under dim conditions, there are several more appropriate lens, 85mm (1.8 or 1.2), 100 f2, 135f2. All these should produce better results.

Of course the 100mm macro can still be used and 2.8 is still quite fast, just that it is not the best tool. You have to disable close focussing and somehow my test shots showed that it is not as sharp compared to 135 at a distance. I suppose the lens is optimised for close focus.

 

[mpenza]

agree with u on use of other lenses for dim conditions shot wide open, f2.8 only gives twice as fast shutter speeds (vs the 70-200F4L), while the f2 would give 4 times faster and be more useful when lighting conditions are poor.

as for sharpnesswise, the 100mm macro usm is good enough for me (some sample variation i think, my prev one was sharper wide open compared to the one i have now)... would expect the 135/2 to be slightly sharper cos it's more expensive too!

for a relatively wide and fast lens for use under dim conditions, i would probably go for the sigma 20/1.8. have it but yet to use it much so far. was hoping to use it during a friend's wedding comin up soon ;p

 

[srisaro]

Friends, Great thoughts ! So with my current set of the following lenses

a. 17-40mm F4L
b. 70-200mm F4L

which of these do you think I should think of buying..

a. 50mm F1.4 ?
b. 135mm F2L ?
c. 100mm F2.8 Macro?

 

[An drew]

Agree with you.

I think I have a sharp copy of the 100mm macro and I love it.

I also love the 50mm f1.8, my greatest value for money lens.

which of these do you think I should think of buying..

a. 50mm F1.4 ?
b. 135mm F2L ?
c. 100mm F2.8 Macro?

It depends on what you want to do.

If you are on a budget, pehaps the 50 f1.8 and 85 f1.8. Otherwise the 135 if you do not need macro.

 

[mpenza]

50/1.8 sounds like a good "fill-in" at a very affordable cost ($140?) focussing is a bit slow too, especially when contrast is poor.

 

[srisaro]

Thanks friend ! But settling for the 50 F1.8 comes with the need to upgrade after sometime for want of sharpness, fast etc..

 

[Goldenstars08]

Thanks friend ! But settling for the 50 F1.8 comes with the need to upgrade after sometime for want of sharpness, fast etc..

For the EF 50mm F/1.8, Image is soft below F/2.8. So if possible shoot at F/2.8 or smaller F-stop...

 

[user111]

EF 70-200/2.8L look no further

 

[mpenza]

heavy though!

 

[light]

Thanks friend ! But settling for the 50 F1.8 comes with the need to upgrade after sometime for want of sharpness, fast etc..

The 50mm is one of the sharpest lens around.. need to upgrade to 'something' for sharpness..what would that be? Curious..:think:

 

[sk.images]

The 50mm is one of the sharpest lens around.. need to upgrade to 'something' for sharpness..what would that be? Curious..:think:

Agreed, my 50 1.8II is VERY sharp, even at 1.8, the image below is straight from the cam and shot at f/1.8