Only one lens: what would it be?

[pixie08]

Hi all,

I am sure this has been asked many times before but indulge me if you don't mind. I have a few lenses but nothing super great so I am also up for renting one for our upcoming trip if need be. I will most likely bring my 50mm no matter what because I like to use it for portraits of my toddler.My go to lens is my 10-18mm 5-5.6 is. I find I have been getting blurry pictures and wasn't super happy with it last trip.It is probably user error as I am pretty much an amateur but looking for something crisper.

However if you could only bring one other lens what could it be? A light lens is a bonus (I have a crop sensor T3i so I have to keep that in mind too).TIA!

 

[mom2rtk]

One lens on a Canon crop sensor? Hands down, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8. Spectacular lens, perfect range for most situations in the parks.

 

[pixie08]

One lens on a Canon crop sensor? Hands down, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8. Spectacular lens, perfect range for most situations in the parks.

I will look into that, thank you! I am assuming the 2.8 helps out in low light? I don't really care so much about on dark rides but pictures in the evenings and such...

 

[mom2rtk]

I will look into that, thank you! I am assuming the 2.8 helps out in low light? I don't really care so much about on dark rides but pictures in the evenings and such...

Yes, the 2.8 helps in low light. As does the IS.

 

[havoc315]

The greatest lens on earth won't give "crisp" pictures if not using the camera correctly. In fact, if you're looking at 4x6 type images, you won't even see the difference in "crispness" of a $100 old used lens, and a $5,000 Zeiss otus.

When most people find their images blatantly soft, it's because they aren't properly obtaining focus, and/or they are using shutter speeds that are too slow.

 

[jvz82]

I brought a 24mm 2.8 and an external flash. I have discovered that I'm not crazy about zoom lenses. I just don't like how they feel and it's harder for me to get the shots I want. Admittedly it's probably from lack of practice too. But I love my primes.

The 24mm is light and small, so that was nice. It does pretty well in low light, not as well as my 50mm 1.4 but good enough. I did need the external flash though so I could use it indoors like at character meals.

 

[pixie08]

The greatest lens on earth won't give "crisp" pictures if not using the camera correctly. In fact, if you're looking at 4x6 type images, you won't even see the difference in "crispness" of a $100 old used lens, and a $5,000 Zeiss otus.

When most people find their images blatantly soft, it's because they aren't properly obtaining focus, and/or they are using shutter speeds that are too slow.

Yes. One hundred percent, I am not super amateur (but not a pro by any means) I have taken a few classes in my time (art major) and use manual focus when I am not chasing my toddler around. I completely agree that the camera and the person behind it make the picture but I do think you are wrong in the sense that the lens that a lens makes a difference in terms of the focal length and how fast a lens is for lighting conditions.

 

[pixie08]

I brought a 24mm 2.8 and an external flash. I have discovered that I'm not crazy about zoom lenses. I just don't like how they feel and it's harder for me to get the shots I want. Admittedly it's probably from lack of practice too. But I love my primes.

The 24mm is light and small, so that was nice. It does pretty well in low light, not as well as my 50mm 1.4 but good enough. I did need the external flash though so I could use it indoors like at character meals.

I do love prime lenses. I have a nifty fifty and it great! How does it compare in terms of focal length with the 50? I find the fifty is a bit awkward on the crop sensor body since its equivalent is like 80mm. the 24mm might solve this problem.

 

[jvz82]

I do love prime lenses. I have a nifty fifty and it great! How does it compare in terms of focal length with the 50? I find the fifty is a bit awkward on the crop sensor body since its equivalent is like 80mm. the 24mm might solve this problem.

It makes a big difference. With the 24, I can take a picture of someone sitting right beside me. With the 50, I'd have to be backing up all the time. I also have a crop sensor.

This is a picture of my daughter at Cinderella's Royal Table. We were at a very tiny table for 2 and she was sitting right across from me. I didn't have to back up or anything.


CRT is fairly crowded, but I was able to get both my daughter and princesses in the shots standing right next to me. I was back in a corner so no room for backing up.


Hope that helps!!

 

[havoc315]

Yes. One hundred percent, I am not super amateur (but not a pro by any means) I have taken a few classes in my time (art major) and use manual focus when I am not chasing my toddler around. I completely agree that the camera and the person behind it make the picture but I do think you are wrong in the sense that the lens that a lens makes a difference in terms of the focal length and how fast a lens is for lighting conditions.

Of course lenses have different focal lengths and apertures. They also do have differing sharpness. But when you're just looking at web sized images, you won't perceive the sharpness differences most of the time.
Thus, first get your images "crisp" with the cheap lens, before worrying about even sharper lenses.

 

[wenrob]

Hi all,

I am sure this has been asked many times before but indulge me if you don't mind. I have a few lenses but nothing super great so I am also up for renting one for our upcoming trip if need be. I will most likely bring my 50mm no matter what because I like to use it for portraits of my toddler.My go to lens is my 10-18mm 5-5.6 is. I find I have been getting blurry pictures and wasn't super happy with it last trip.It is probably user error as I am pretty much an amateur but looking for something crisper.

However if you could only bring one other lens what could it be? A light lens is a bonus (I have a crop sensor T3i so I have to keep that in mind too).TIA!

Given your question about f/2.8 being good in lowlight if I had to hazard a guess I would say your blurry photos from the 10-18mm are due to your shutter speed being too low. I agree with havoc315 that you should look into why your photos are not coming out the way you want them before you go jumping to another lens. If you're willing to post some images with settings we could probably help you figure it out. You don't want to toss money at the issue (even if it's just a rental) if the problem is technique.

eta: There's a difference between "soft" and "blurry" images. Soft is when you didn't quite achieve focus. This can be caused by your focus technique, the lens hunting in lowlight and not being able to grab focus, something wrong with the lens/or a combo of all of the above. Blurry is caused by movement usually that of the subject or the photographer. Again this can be caused by user error but most commonly it is because your shutter speed is too slow. That you describe your photos as "blurry" and are looking for something good in lowlight this leads me to believe this is the case. f/5-5.6 can be used in lowlight but you have to put the muscle behind it; raise your ISO or use a flash.

 

[pixie08]

It makes a big difference. With the 24, I can take a picture of someone sitting right beside me. With the 50, I'd have to be backing up all the time. I also have a crop sensor.

This is a picture of my daughter at Cinderella's Royal Table. We were at a very tiny table for 2 and she was sitting right across from me. I didn't have to back up or anything.
View attachment 222597

CRT is fairly crowded, but I was able to get both my daughter and princesses in the shots standing right next to me. I was back in a corner so no room for backing up.
View attachment 222599

Hope that helps!!

These are amazing! Thank you!

 

[pixie08]

Of course lenses have different focal lengths and apertures. They also do have differing sharpness. But when you're just looking at web sized images, you won't perceive the sharpness differences most of the time.
Thus, first get your images "crisp" with the cheap lens, before worrying about even sharper lenses.

Right. I get that. I have no problem with crisp images outdoors but indoors is the issue or low light.

 

[pixie08]

Given your question about f/2.8 being good in lowlight if I had to hazard a guess I would say your blurry photos from the 10-18mm are due to your shutter speed being too low. I agree with havoc315 that you should look into why your photos are not coming out the way you want them before you go jumping to another lens. If you're willing to post some images with settings we could probably help you figure it out. You don't want to toss money at the issue (even if it's just a rental) if the problem is technique.

eta: There's a difference between "soft" and "blurry" images. Soft is when you didn't quite achieve focus. This can be caused by your focus technique, the lens hunting in lowlight and not being able to grab focus, something wrong with the lens/or a combo of all of the above. Blurry is caused by movement usually that of the subject or the photographer. Again this can be caused by user error but most commonly it is because your shutter speed is too slow. That you describe your photos as "blurry" and are looking for something good in lowlight this leads me to believe this is the case. f/5-5.6 can be used in lowlight but you have to put the muscle behind it; raise your ISO or use a flash.

Ah. I have had both issues. Soft and blurry lol. So I guess I should practice pumping up the ISO which I usually do not do. I do use a flash and it helps the issue. I have an external flash, and guess I should use that more often because the camera flash looks terrible usually.

 

[wenrob]

Ah. I have had both issues. Soft and blurry lol. So I guess I should practice pumping up the ISO which I usually do not do. I do use a flash and it helps the issue. I have an external flash, sand guess i should use that more often because the camera flash looks terrible usually.

You can put a modifier on it to soften it up a bit. If I'm using a flash inside I prefer to bounce it if I can. Not a lot of options for that in Disney though. If I have to use direct flash I "drag the shutter" with my flash in rear curtain sync so I just have a little pop of flash at the end. Here is an article on it if you are interested. (as an aside I learned how to do this on this board many, many moons ago.)
http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/dragging-the-shutter/

 

[pixie08]

You can put a modifier on it to soften it up a bit. If I'm using a flash inside I prefer to bounce it if I can. Not a lot of options for that in Disney though. If I have to use direct flash I "drag the shutter" with my flash in rear curtain sync so I just have a little pop of flash at the end. Here is an article on it if you are interested. (as an aside I learned how to do this on this board many, many moons ago.)
http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/dragging-the-shutter/

Thank you!!!!

 

[wenrob]

Thank you!!!!

 

[bob100]

Right. I get that. I have no problem with crisp images outdoors but indoors is the issue or low light.

yes, a low shutter speed can result in "blurry pics" (with expensive or inexpensive lens)

 

[Brians_myth]

Are your photos blurry in natural light or indoors/at night?

If they're blurry in natural light, increase your shutter speed to 1/1200-1/4000 (adjust ISO and f/stop accordingly).
If they are blurry otherwise, look into getting a higher aperture prime lens (especially because you love portraiture).
If you have the funds, look into the 1's.

Edit: I see now that natural light is not the issue. lol

 

[havoc315]

Are your photos blurry in natural light or indoors/at night?

If they're blurry in natural light, increase your shutter speed to 1/1200-1/4000 (adjust ISO and f/stop accordingly).
If they are blurry otherwise, look into getting a higher aperture prime lens (especially because you love portraiture).
If you have the funds, look into the 1's.

Edit: I see now that natural light is not the issue. lol

Correct. Indoor-blurry generally is not directly a lens issue. It's an issue that your shutter speed simply isn't fast enough. That may be correctable. But if you are pushing the aperture limits of your lens, and the ISO limits of the camera, then the only solution is a lens with wider aperture. (Thus it can be indirectly a lens issue) .