jkaufman

I am trying to find a good low light lens so I don't have to constantly use my flash in my house. I take a ton of pictures of my family, especially my kids age 4 and 6 months. I have read that the above lens is very good for low light, but was wondering if anyone had it and if they found it useful. Or if anyone has any ideas for low light situations in which I don't want to lose the quality. My current Canon camera is not anything special but I want to really learn how to use it, since I am a beginner and then upgrade in the future if I see the need. Thank you!

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

I usually find a 24mm or 40 mm 2.8 fast enough in the house , my son comes over and puts on more lights with his 18-135, all Canon stuff, when wanting better color I'll bounce flash off a fill card and the white ceiling, better color balance, Bob.

Lucasdv123

I have one but I don't know if it is a 1.4 or 1.8.try placing your camara on a tripod and slowing down the shutter speed.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

I use 50mm f/1.8 under indoor window light. It's tack sharp and very fast in this kind of light.

Big Bill Loc: Phoenix, AZ

I use the same lens.
Cheap, light, and very good.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I've had the EF 35 f/1.4 L for several years now. Rugged build. Excellent bokeh. Very quick, precise, and nearly silent autofocus. Excellent IQ under any lighting condition. I've used it on a 70D, 7D MkII, 6D, and now a 5D MkIV. Excellent results on all of them. If you have an APS-C sensor Canon then the field of view is comparable to a 56mm on a full frame. A popular and useful focal length. Now that the Mk II version is out you should see some favorable pricing on the original. Don't forget to check canon.com for refurbs. They are every bit as good as new.
If you are going to be shooting at close range with large apertures be sure you understand what your depth of field will be like before investing in a lens.
Here is a review of the lens that will give you all the info you want, and then some:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f14.htm

Mathman Loc: Bellingham, Washington

I recently acquired a Canon 50mm f/1.4 to use in portrait and low light situations. I love it for this work. What really impressed me was some pictures I took at a party in December. There was no light from outside and only a few table lamps on. I got some great candid shot of folks without using a distracting flash. I could have chosen the Canon 50mm f/1.2 L, but it was way too pricey. If you don't have a "nifty 50" lens you might want to consider it. Canon also makes a 50mm f/1.8 which is even less expensive than the f/1.4.

jkaufman

Thank you all for your insight, it has been helpful.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

jkaufman - it does matter what camera you have and how much you want to spend. I've owned my 35L going back to shooting a 7D. I've since moved to full frame and added the 24L. At f/1.4 both the L lenses are very artistic in their narrow DOF and out of focus blur. They both perform excellent from f/1.4 onward giving you options to balance the aperture, DOF and corner to corner sharpness with the available light (and ISO).

But, maybe you should be considering either of the IS enabled 28 f/2.8 or 35 f/2 models as well as the f/1.8 nifty-fifty or either of the EF-S 24 and EF 40 pancake models. For a wide angle prime lens at 35mm or wider, are you down on the floor and close to the young ones? Even with the crop factor, your best images need to be close, intimate and frame-filling. You might find the 40 / 50 or even the 85 f/1.8 or 100 f/2 lenses to be better models, depending on your camera, style and budget. You could get a couple of these very capable primes lenses for the price of one of the Ls new.

The older 35L is a wonderful lens and probably my most frequently used prime on all EOS cameras I've owned. It's a sturdy and good-sized lens, another consideration. Even with the IS, the non L / non pancake lenses in the list earlier are all significantly physically smaller and lighter than either of the two L ideas.

Finally, I'd shop used at KEH for a EX or EX+ model before purchasing any of these lenses new. The 35L II has been out long enough there should be several of the older 35L lens available.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

When you go to an f/1.4, you get a bigger, heavier, more expensive lens that may not give you the quality of an f/2.8. Increasing ISO one stop will achieve the same result for free.

machia Loc: NJ

In picking a lens for indoor low light shooting , anything 2.8 and below will do the job . But when you go into the 1.4 or 1.2 range it's going to cost you . I have a Canon 50mm that I picked up from Canon , refurbished for 89 bucks and at 1.8 it's a great indoor lens . However if you camera is an APS-C type , just remember that the lens will become an 80mm .

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Increase your ISO and give that a try.
Consider the 85mm 1.8 which is a great lens for the money.
40mm pancake lens is also a great lens for the money...but not as fast.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Crop sensor will reduce the field of view of the lens but doesn't change the focal length.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

jkaufman

This is very helpful discussion for me, I really appreciate it! My problem is that my 50mm gets me too close and that is why I was looking at the 35mm. I have tried increasing the ISO but the the picture then ends up a bit grainy (this could be my fault being a novice) so I constantly use a flash and bounce it off walls to generate some neat lighting but at times just want normal pictures. Lol. As for using a tripod, I have done this for holidays but as you can imagine taking pictures of young children you have to be quick and they are constantly on the move.

machia Loc: NJ

The field of view equates to 80mm . Where am I going wrong ?
50mm X 1.6 = 80mm