Low Light Kit Replacement

[jri4]

I'm shooting Canon Rebel XS with the kit EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens right now. For family functions indoors, lighting may be too low and images come out blurry. I have a 50mm f/1.8 lens, but sometimes that length is too long for crowded indoor events.

What could I buy to replace my kit lens? Try your best to keep it under $500 (this could be used on eBay). Is a lens with a 2.8 f-stop going to be much better? Here is what I was looking at:

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF SP AF

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro

Thanks for the help!
~Jri4

[jnelson]

good timing, i just got my Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 in the mail yesterday! Keep in mind, mine is on a Nikon D40 so your results may vary. So far i'm pretty impressed, the build quality seems great, zoom is smooth and easy, AF is pretty quick for a 3rd party lens, and i was able to take some great shots last night in our family room with only one small lamp on (thats really good for me). I looked at the Tamron 17-50 but the Sigma had faster AF and had better reviews. There is a new Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 w/ VC that was really nice but it jumped up to around 650 i think. My sigma was around 440 from adorama w/ free shipping and a free tiffen slim UV filter and cleaning kit. The cleaning kit is mostly junk but the filter and free shipping were an awesome bonus.

[ddr]

i've tried both the tamron (non-VC) and the sigma and I have to say the tamron is sharper. both need to stopped down to about F/4 to be sharp, and both have trouble focusing at night. all reviews i've read pointed to the tamron (non-VC, not enough for the new VC). It's really cheap at the moment on ebay.ca, from ebay store prodigital2000 (where I got mine).

[toddybear]

I have the Tamron, and I am happy about it. I recomend it.

[vandergus]

There are a couple more primes you could check out. The Sigma 30mm f1.4 would give you a normal field of view and a whole lot of light on your sensor. A little expensive at $440 US but it is within your budget. There's also the Canon 35mm f2, which sells for about $320. Canon makes a 28mm f1.8 as well but I don't think it has the best reputation. The first two would probably be better performers.

[jri4]

Thanks for all the suggestions! I'm going to start looking around for the Tamron, but keep the Sigma definitely in mind. I like the idea of primes (I love my 50mm f1.8) but the other day at a family party in my basement my girlfriend tried to take pictures of little ones with it and had to stand far enough away that other people blocked the view. I am hoping to find a good lens that has similar zoom to a kit lens 18-55mm. This way it is all purpose.

So, being an amateur I ask you, is the difference between f3.5 and f2.8 going to be enough to capture people and events happening in low light? Is it really even worth it?

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by jri4

So, being an amateur I ask you, is the difference between f3.5 and f2.8 going to be enough to capture people and events happening in low light? Is it really even worth it?

That's not even a stop (2/3), so it won't be a HUGE difference, but the thing you have to look at is the long end: the two lenses you list are still faster at the telephoto end. In the first case it's 50mm @ f/2.8 and the other is 70mm @ f/4.5 (and likely larger at 50-55mm). These compare to 55mm @ f/5.6

2.8 to 5.6 is 2 full stops, and that IS important and noticeable.

Primes may be your best bet, just keep your crop factor in mind.

50mm = 80mm on your XS, which is verging on portrait lens territory. You'd be good to look at a 30mm with a similar aperture. Any wider and prices start to get ridiculous. Even a 30mm f/2 is almost a full 2 stops faster than your kit lens is at 18 and like 2 full stops than it is at 30mm.

If you *really* need a wider option, just stick the kit lens on and shoot at 18mm: you can safely handhold 1/30s without much trouble and with IS youre likely gonna get it down to 1/10 or 1/15. It wont freeze action, but it'll do decent enough.

[jri4]

Yeah I guess... but I was trying to photograph rugrats playing... ugghh... My prime, as I said, was too long, but the kit 18-55 pics came out blurry. I can also use the flash, but it looks horrid in that cramped setting (plus all i've got is the on-camera flash)

Thanks for all the advice! You guys have been more helpful than you probably think!
~James

[thegrandpoohbah]

I have the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and I love it. However, for shooting indoors in low light it still isn't enough. You should really consider spending that $500 on a 580EX II speedlight. I wish I'd gotten a flash first rather than upgrading the lens as it would have made more of a difference overall.

[darosk]

I'm going to second the Sigma 30 1.4 - it is a fantastic lens which I've had extensive experience with. On a Rebel it's a good focal length, not too wide, but not too short either. Either that or stretch a little more for a speedlite.