Does this lens do well indoors, in low light?
230128
Yes, it can handle low light better than most lenses, but it also depends on your camera, to get a strong capture. Most people invest in this lens for it's ability to isolate the subject (with informed and good composition).
230129
It has nothing to do with the lens, low light has to do with the camera. The 1.4 Fstop helps, but if you have a pro level DSLR going to 100,000 ISO is no problem.
230130
I use this lens solely for portraits, in a studio, with strobe flash. It works great for that. I haven't used it otherwise.
230131
Yes it does. That is the purpose of the 1.4 f-stop to let in the maximum amount of light. When shooting in a low light situation where flash is not an option this is the lens of choice.
509388
If you mean night vision by low light conditions then its pretty good for that. You would have to shoot it open around f1.2-1.8 even f2 its great. The large aperture gives you the ability to do so. Your DOF will be a bit shallow but the ability to shoot faster with a lower Iso will make up for it.Also remember its a manual focus lens.
19800
It has performed very well for me in low light situations. I have been startled a few times by the brightness of the recorded image. I usually use a Pentax 18-250mm lens.
735141
The low light indoor photos are not very good on the Nikon. The focus is also often off if there is low light indoors on the Nikon 3500. The Canon cameras are much better in low light.
907946
Yes this lense works well in low light because of its apature of 2.8. You still will be workin in a higher ISO so make sure your camera can handle that. As for the type of photos you want, for ill body you will want to be in the 7meter range,, and if you want pictures tighter than that you will want to be closer. Those numbers will change if your camera is a crop censor. Hope this helps
648774
In my personal experience, it's a bit difficult to focus in lowlight situations. If it's as dark as a room with very dim lights, then I do not recommend this. In addition, I try to keep the ISO at a max of 1600. If I have to, I will go up to 3200. The noise/grain is noticeable around 3200, and it is a bit noticeable even at 1600.
1759794
Oh, I'll add this:"Great for indoor" yeah that's matketing lingo for "this lens has a big, fast maximum aperture of f2."All lenses are mostly "good for outdoors/broad daylight". But faster max apertures can suck in more light than others which is particularly useful A) if you want amazing bokeh and shallow depth of field (B) you're inside and have horrid light and the extra 2-3 stops will get you the shot.
2227141
I have taken pictures of the inside of the house with this lens and have had no problem showing the whole room. Should be fine for what you want to do with it.
1784424
No, this is perfect for portraits, unless you have been using a 105mm. Lense is a little bit heavier than if you went with fixed focus, but the 24-70 is just perfect for indoors & the f/2.8 let's you keep you ISO at about 200 & still shoot without flash. WARNING: Don't use lens hood with on-camera flash at less than 45mm. You will get a shadow at the bottom of picture.
456871
In broad daylight, not too bad....in low light - pretty terrible. That said, I don't hardly use autofocus, and overall this lens is a good buy. I don't regret it.
143451
The lens is not that great for taking portraits, but we tried indoor telephoto shots with some success. since it doesn
406
Yeah buying a zoom lens for indoor low light shooting is where photography starts to become expensive. Canon's 70-200 f2.8L is over a thousand dollars, so depending on how far away from the subject you are, I'd suggest a prime lens at any one of several focal lengths offered at apertures of f1.4, f1.8, or f2.8. I've personally had great success using the 50mm f1.8, but since you're asking about telephoto zoom lenses, it seems you might need a little more reach. The Canon 200mm f2.8L lists for $750, and the 100mm f2 is about $400, and that's about the same price as the 85mm f1.8. So it depends on your needs pretty much. Yeah buying a zoom lens for indoor low light shooting is where photography starts to become expensive. Canon's 70-200 f2.8L is over a thousand dollars, so depending on how far away from the subject you are, I'd suggest a prime lens at any one of several focal lengths offered at apertures of f1.4, f1.8, or f2.8. I've personally had great success using the 50mm f1.8, but since you're asking about telephoto zoom lenses, it seems you might need a little more reach. The Canon 200mm f2.8L lists for $750, and the 100mm f2 is about $400, and that's about the same price as the 85mm f1.8. So it... » Read More Yeah buying a zoom lens for indoor low light shooting is where photography starts to become expensive. Canon's 70-200 f2.8L is over a thousand dollars, so depending on how far away from the subject you are, I'd suggest a prime lens at any one of several focal lengths offered at apertures of f1.4, f1.8, or f2.8. I've personally had great success using the 50mm f1.8, but since you're asking about telephoto zoom lenses, it seems you might need a little more reach. The Canon 200mm f2.8L lists for $750, and the 100mm f2 is about $400, and that's about the same price as the 85mm f1.8. So it depends on your needs pretty much. « Show Less
1556822
Yes, it is excellent! The Pro Low Light setting when using Macro mode makes it a snap for indoor close up shots!
2234737
I tested it indoors and quality was fine. I imagine quality in daylight is better than artificial light...just like most cameras.
1078335
The 50mm 1.4 is great for indoor low-light portraiture, unless you are shooting groups of people -- you may not have enough space to step back. Lately I've been using the 85mm 1.8 more. The extra length does a better job of blurring the background at shorter distances, which helps isolate the subject further. Indoors it's great for tight crops of faces and outdoors I mostly use it for candid shots while street walking. One thing to keep in mind though, the longer focal range requires you to shoot at a relatively faster shutter speed, which makes it tougher to hand hold in dim light. I've considered upgrading to the 85mm 1.4, although that opens up a whole new can of worms... long story short, most feel the 1.8 is better bang for the buck, while the rest are convinced that the 1.4 is legendary. (For what it's worth, I'm using these lenses on a D90, APS-C)
1186461
I use this lens primarily for architectural photos. But I imagine it would be ok. It's not the fastest lens in its class, so if stopping action in low light is an issue, you may want to consider that.
1545471
It rocks. It's low light performance is excellent and it's lens can reach out from the back of the hall. I used this camera to take stills at my son's graduation and get superior results. I did not shoot video.