Faster lens or Flash??

[jepry]

I am trying to take better pictures of family/friends in low light conditions indoors. I currently have a Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3, and a Canon 50 1.8 on my XT.

I am debating on getting a Canon 24-70L 2.8, or Sigma/Tamron equivalent or a Flash. Which of these would be the better purchase...Lens or Flash??

Thanks

 

[Big Mike]

"Better" isn't really something that we can answer for you.

You already have a 50mm F1.8...so an F2.8 lens isn't going to make it any easier for low light...would make it harder actually.

So if you are still struggling when using F1.8 or F2.0...then a flash would be a good idea.

 

[jepry]

"Better" isn't really something that we can answer for you.

You already have a 50mm F1.8...so an F2.8 lens isn't going to make it any easier for low light...would make it harder actually.

So if you are still struggling when using F1.8 or F2.0...then a flash would be a good idea.

I wouldn't say that I am struggling with the 1.8, I just don't like being stuck at that focal length and my Sigma is not doing the job in low lights.

 

[Big Mike]

I also find that I don't use my 50mm F1.8 as much as I used to...because it's just too long on my digital bodies.

I have a Sigma 30mm F1.4 and a Tamron 18-50mm F2.8 that I use in lower light situations. Of course, I love to use my flash and bounce it off of walls and ceilings as well.

 

[Mav]

Just get a flash. It's tough to keep anything in focus at larger apertures anyways, and the fixed focal lengths can be too limiting. Zoom is handy for family stuff. If I shot Canon I'd get an EF 24-105 f/4L IS and a flash and go to town. That's a great range, and I generally don't shoot people stuff at larger than f/4 anyways. And the reach out to 105mm is great for getting head shots. There's nothing equivalent in the Nikon system at the moment.

 

[JerryPH]

Another vote for the flash. Fast lenses are important to have but when you are trying to shoot rooms or multiple family members in a home, you cannot beat a wide lens and a well lit room at F/8 (wide meaning something in the 10-30mm range). My Sigma 18-50 is my fav family event camera... that or my Nikkor 18-200, just because of the incredible range and versatility.

I just place my strobe(s) in the corner(s) of the room and enjoy the results!

 

[*Mike*]

You've already got some great advice. A flash is utterly invaluable. And, you do have the 50/1.8 (which is a great lens).

That said, an f/6.3 (?!) at the long end makes a lens a paper weight in my experience. And, if you're zoomed in to 200mm, odds are a flash isn't going to do much good - say catching action at a little league. The distance is just too much...

I'd consider what kind of shooting you're doing... Personally, I would have to have a flash. Then I'd put the cheap zoom away and try to pick up a decent wide angle and then something on the telephoto side of things...

 

[JerryPH]

I'd consider what kind of shooting you're doing...

He pretty much said what he was doing when he said:

I am trying to take better pictures of family/friends in low light conditions indoors.

I cannot see the effectiveness of being at 200mm indoors, unless you are zoomed into a face or hand instead of a family scene.

 

[jepry]

Thanks for all the advice guys!!

Now I am thinking I could get a Canon 17-40 f4L for $699 and a Speedlite 430EX for $299 which is still cheaper than the Canon 24-70 f2.8L.

Would that be a better solution??

Thanks again!!

 

[Mystwalker]

Thanks for all the advice guys!!

Now I am thinking I could get a Canon 17-40 f4L for $699 and a Speedlite 430EX for $299 which is still cheaper than the Canon 24-70 f2.8L.

Would that be a better solution??

Thanks again!!

I use the 17-40 and 580EXII indoors for toddler shots.

With flash I can even use my 28-135 which is "f/3.5-5.6" (something like that).

For a non-pro like myself, the flash is almost a "fix-all" for indoor shooting

 

[jepry]

I use the 17-40 and 580EXII indoors for toddler shots.

With flash I can even use my 28-135 which is "f/3.5-5.6" (something like that).

For a non-pro like myself, the flash is almost a "fix-all" for indoor shooting

I will be taking a lot of baby shots soon, how do u find the 17-40 for portraits? I read that it is only good for full body shots not for portraits.

 

[Big Mike]

Typically, for portraits...you want a longer lens because it's more flattening (and flattering) to the subject. The wider the lens...the more likely you are to have wide angle distortion.

 

[Mystwalker]

I will be taking a lot of baby shots soon, how do u find the 17-40 for portraits? I read that it is only good for full body shots not for portraits.

What Mike said

I have not noticed any distortion at 40mm, but then I can count # of portrait opportunities on one hand. My daughter never stop moving - forget about standing still for more then 5 secs at a time.

I read that 85mm to 100mm is the ideal length for portraits so have been using my 50mm or 70-200 ... do not remember if they mean 85mm to 100mm on FF camera.