Ideal lens for action scenes in low light for a Canon XSI.

[Reznik Akime]

Hopefully something that won't break the bank, but knowing cameras it most likely will. Just looking for recommendations at the moment. The image quality won't have to be something crazy professional, just something for a local newspaper or for hobbyist.

[hale88]

dont know about other people. But this is what I am using right now.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

here is my example: the Ram

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...08539&page=111

[itznfb]

The only low light lens you're really going to find for cheap is the 50mm f/1.8. Next you got the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 for about $400. Price goes up exponentially from there.

[Reznik Akime]

That one lens seems nice, Hale.

I'll look into the 50mm f/1.8. It's pretty darned cheap and may just suit the purpose we need it to.

[hale88]

yeh no problem. I think the 50mm seem to be fit into your criteria since you only use it for newspaper and It's around $100 bucks not bad...

[Lestat]

none of hales lenses are for what you asked for, i think he didnt even read what you were asking for.

fast lens low light action,,,not slow lens, higher lighting of a still subject... HA! the irony...

try the 50mm F1.8 you will be very happy. but never forget that 50mm on that camera is zoomed because of the crop and just by its very nature. if you can,,,, see about a 30mm like the sigma 30mm F/1.4, that lens its just freakishly sweat.

tonight i went to the company xmas party and got a shot of the xmas tree there, a fake job, but a little under 6ft tall.... i was nearly 15ft or more away in order to get the entire thing in frame.....

but you also did not explain what breaking the bank is.
100? 200? 300?

also, low light action shots are hard to do, period no matter what the lens if a flash is not wanted then be prepaired to take alot of shots to get what you want, and a fast lens will give a very narrow focus point and lots of blurring.

[agor]

low light fast lens?
This is post #7 and I'm asking myself why no one did recommend the Canon 85mm 1.8. One of the fastest lenses around, and it isn't too much of a price tag.
I don't know if the 50mm 1.8 is fast enough, depends on what he wants to shoot. It also might be too short for some indoor sports

[Reznik Akime]

You're right. I didn't post what I need it for because it's not me who actually needs it. I'm just relaying what I've been asked.

For all intents and purposes, it will have to be a fast lens. Indoor sports is exactly what she's trying to tackle. And breaking the bank would be more than $200.

[hale88]

I did not say that He has to buy the lens the same lens that I am using. Just I gave the idea of I am using...Also the link up there has alot of review of diff. kind lenses so He can do more research before He pays for what He does not know about... Someone tries to being SMART, just be...I am not mad. I am cool ) because My exp. is not so good as "They"...

BTW, here is my fav link ever, All about Canon SLR and Lenses...Read it and you will know which lens you will buy (Hopefully)

http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html

[3oh6]

$200 wouldn't be enough i don't think as they usually run $300, but for indoor sports THE lens to have is the 85mm F/1.8 for anyone starting out. great length for under the basket in basketball, can still reach out to the top of the key from the baseline and can handle volleyball as well if you have good access. a little purple fringing around white jerseys when wide open but as agor said, super super fast focus...super fast.

i've got a bucket load of quality shots with the 85...its always on a body when i am indoors
if there is any way to stretch the budget at all, it is well worth it IMO. usually can be had for $300~$350 on fred miranda from good sellers. HTH

[Reznik Akime]

That was just the post I was looking for. Thanks.

[itznfb]

low light fast lens?
This is post #7 and I'm asking myself why no one did recommend the Canon 85mm 1.8. One of the fastest lenses around, and it isn't too much of a price tag.
I don't know if the 50mm 1.8 is fast enough, depends on what he wants to shoot. It also might be too short for some indoor sports

The 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8 are the same aperture. 1.8. I'm not sure where you're getting that the 85mm is "faster".

[inCore]

The thing is, unless you invest in a low-aperture lens, you won't just be getting 'not great' photos, you'll be getting horrible / unusable ones. Whilst the XSi does have 12.2 Megapixels, it's not known for amazing low-light capabilities. I'd personally state that the 50mm is too short. When shooting outside sports, I've often found that even my 200mm is far too short, and something similar can be said for indoor sports. If you can get close to the action, the 85mm could be just about enough. I mention the 12.2 Megapixels because with the 50mm, you'd end up cropping most of the shots so much that you loose a lot of the quality. Also, due to the proportions that a longer lens gives the various subjects in the picture, they're more suitable for action shots. By this I mean, with a wide-angle lens, everything at the front looks unproportionately large compared to the things at the back of the picture, with a longer lens this isn't the case.

The XSi isn't great with high ISOs, which is what you'd be looking at using. You can't use a long shutter speed because you need to capture the action, so you either need to raise the ISO or lower the aperture. Since the images aren't great at high ISO, you simply need a lower aperture. I'm probably going to purchase a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D in February because the 55-200mm f/4-5.6 has an aperture of f/5.6 at 200mm, which is almost unusable when shooting action sports, even outside in good weather, where you want to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible.

[agor]

The 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8 are the same aperture. 1.8. I'm not sure where you're getting that the 85mm is "faster".

the 85 is a USM lens, the 50 1.8 ain't
the AF is faster