Looking for suggestions for prime on full frame

[nvtsallo]

I went to land last fall with my new 5d mark iii and 24-105. I brought a 70-200 f4 is (rented) and only used it at san diego zoo. I am taking my twins to world this year for the 4th and their 6th bday. I want to bring the necessities. Here is my list any suggestions would be great.

5d iii
24-70 ii
70-200 2.8 ii ( will leave in room just in case)
Need a low light prime and not sure what will be good for rides and getting the occasional character pose with both kids in focus.
600 ex rt flash

Considering canon 35mm f2 is or sigma 35mm 1.4

 

[photo_chick]

I'd personally go with the Sigma 35 f/1.4 over the Canon 35mm f/2. There's just no question there.

 

[wbeem]

35mm is a great focal length for dark rides. In my experience, most of the scenes fit in that size and shorter focal lengths are more forgiving to camera shake due to slow shutter speeds in a dark ride.

However, portraits could be another matter. If you want to do an environmental portrait, the 35mm works fine there. For a traditional portrait, something like an 85mm would be better.

 

[bob100]

I went to land last fall with my new 5d mark iii and 24-105. I brought a 70-200 f4 is (rented) and only used it at san diego zoo. I am taking my twins to world this year for the 4th and their 6th bday. I want to bring the necessities. Here is my list any suggestions would be great.

5d iii
24-70 ii
70-200 2.8 ii ( will leave in room just in case)
Need a low light prime and not sure what will be good for rides and getting the occasional character pose with both kids in focus.
600 ex rt flash

Considering canon 35mm f2 is or sigma 35mm 1.4

I would also pick the Sigma 1.4

 

[nvtsallo]

I am torn on the sigma or canon since the is would be nice for compensating camera shake. Just worried with the kids if the is will be the better choice of the extra stop. I know they cost the same and the sigma appears much sharper especially on the edges. Just for a walk about lens not sure which would suit the environment best. Now if the 35 would go to the price of the 24/28 is primes it would be easier. $699 vs $899

 

[photo_chick]

I don't see shake as a huge problem at 35mm. If you go with the 1/focal length rule you're already down to 1/30. Maybe 1/15 if you're rock steady. I can see the uses of going a little slower with IS, it's just not worth sacrificing the sharpness or wider aperture to me. But we all have different needs and wants, so what works for me might not be what works for you.

 

[nvtsallo]

Good point do you think i should go wider for character shots?

 

[wbeem]

Good point do you think i should go wider for character shots?

If I had a wide angle for character shots, I'd push in close to the character and put them off center so I could compose an interesting background for an environmental portrait.

Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. I don't know what focal length this photographer used, but the idea of an environmental portrait is to show someone in context with their surroundings.

http://500px.com/photo/1212353

 

[photo_chick]

Good point do you think i should go wider for character shots?

wbeem makes a good point about environmental portraits, but thats not what most of us shoot when we shoot character shots at WDW. And there is also the perspective you get from using a wide lens that close. 35mm would probably be a little wider than I'd go on full frame for this type of shooting, I tend to stick more with a 50mm because I prefer the perspective you get with a 50mm on a full frame body for that type of shooting.

But that's my approach. It's all about how YOU want to capture things.

I don't think the shot wbeem linked to was shot with a particularly wide angle lens. The perspective looks like a 50mm or longer to me. But who knows what was done to it in editing.

 

[wbeem]

I don't think the shot wbeem linked to was shot with a particularly wide angle lens. The perspective looks like a 50mm or longer to me. But who knows what was done to it in editing.

I suspect that shot was a composite with the subject shot in a studio and the background shot separately. Putting it together makes a nice image for an environmental portrait scene, though.

To put this in perspective, a shot of Mary Poppins in Epcot with some of the British scenery behind her would place her in the right perspective. If you shot her from the other side with the lake in the background, then it doesn't do much for her.

 

[photo_chick]

I suspect that shot was a composite with the subject shot in a studio and the background shot separately. Putting it together makes a nice image for an environmental portrait scene, though.

To put this in perspective, a shot of Mary Poppins in Epcot with some of the British scenery behind her would place her in the right perspective. If you shot her from the other side with the lake in the background, then it doesn't do much for her.

We may be talking about a different kind of perspective here. I mean the perspective you get from a given focal length in regards to both the subject and the visual compression that affects the perceived distance and size of background objects.

Like the Mary Poppins example. I may want to use a longer lens and step back from the subject to bring whatever scenery that is behind her visually closer to her and larger in the frame. Or I may want to move closer and use a wider lens that makes the background elements seem visually farther and also captures a wider view of them. Of course I don't want to get too close and distort the heck out of poor Mary. I personally prefer the 50mm for this type of shooting because it's in the middle and is close to the perspective we naturally see.

 

[wbeem]

We may be talking about a different kind of perspective here. I mean the perspective you get from a given focal length in regards to both the subject and the visual compression that affects the perceived distance and size of background objects.

Like the Mary Poppins example. I may want to use a longer lens and step back from the subject to bring whatever scenery that is behind her visually closer to her and larger in the frame. Or I may want to move closer and use a wider lens that makes the background elements seem visually farther and also captures a wider view of them. Of course I don't want to get too close and distort the heck out of poor Mary. I personally prefer the 50mm for this type of shooting because it's in the middle and is close to the perspective we naturally see.

I understand what you mean and we are talking about different things with perspective. In my case, perspective means that this subject belongs with that background.

With the longer focal length, you're getting compression to bring that background closer to your subject. As you say, shooting with a wider lens (like the 35mm) will make the background seem farther away. It's another aspect of storytelling and depends upon what you want.

The last time I went to MK, I only took the 14-24mm with me. It's way too wide for most shots, but perfect for a few scenes that I had in mind. Most of the time, I just carry the 24-70 with me. If I were going to choose a prime in that range (for a full-frame camera sensor), I'd go with a 35mm. Works for me, but could be totally wrong for someone with a different style.

 

[nvtsallo]

 

[nvtsallo]

I cannot believe its that hard to upload an image. What am I doing wrong? I was trying to upload an example. I have a lot at 24, 28, 35, 50-58. This one was 58 and what I was going after.

 

[BirdsOfPreyDave]

I cannot believe its that hard to upload an image. What am I doing wrong? I was trying to upload an example. I have a lot at 24, 28, 35, 50-58. This one was 58 and what I was going after.

You're linking to a photo on your own computer, which only you can see. You need to upload photos to a web hosting site to share them on DIS.

Click on the purple oval in my signature (with the DVC resorts), which links to a tutorial. While specific to creating a signature, the post also includes a section on putting photos on a hosting site.