Lense for groups of people in small rooms

[IHateMyJob2004]

I am having a hard time deciding what the next lense will be. I just want to make it simple in this thread. I have a Canon EOS Rebel. If you were in a 12'x12' room and want to take pictures from say 6' away of up to 5 people, what lense would you get?

I've run into hte above scenario with my 18-55@18 and it doesn't get everything in frame.

 

[angry hampster]

Something wider than 18mm.

Seriously..take your pick.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

I might try an borrow a 12-24 before taking the plunge. It's not a small investment. If only there was a 12-XX where XX was 30+, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

 

[bobdole369]

We shot a birthday party (informally) with a Rebel XT on a tripod - with the 18-55 kit lens. It gave us the flexibility to handle group AND portraits.

We also swapped in the 50mm f/1.8 for portraits and staged shots.
The 85mm prime was ideal for outside stuff but not usable indoors obviously.

If I had to pick one lens to go with, it'd be the 18-55 zoom, though even 18 is not "quite" enough for decent sized groups. We were nearly unable to fit all 80 people or so at one end of the tennis courts in the shot.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Ya, ahve the 18-55. jsut to many times that I wish it went lower. The 15-85 is a possible replacement that proviodes a 15% improvement in FoV. But I might just do the 12-24 or so type lense.

I wish I could just win the lottery and be done with it.

 

[angry hampster]

Ya, ahve the 18-55. jsut to many times that I wish it went lower. The 15-85 is a possible replacement that proviodes a 15% improvement in FoV. But I might just do the 12-24 or so type lense.

I wish I could just win the lottery and be done with it.

I would *strongly* consider Sigma's 10-20mm lens. It's very wide and is reasonably priced. I owned one for a couple of years with good success.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

After alot of thinking, I would like to grab one of the following in the next month. Boldfaced and underlined items are the ones I am mostly interested in due to pricing. I am considering the unerlined item if it is worth it. Everything else is pretty much out of my price range. All feed back is welcome! Item 2 or 4 was recomended in the previous post and seems to be a very popular lense. Whcih 10-20 did you mean angryHampster? Thoughts?

My thought is that I would much prefer an 10-24mm or 12-24mm lense. So, I am leaning towards items 1 or 3. Probably item 3.

-- 1 --
$470
Tamron
SP AF 10-24mm f / 3.5-4.5 DI II Zoom Lens For Canon DSLR Cameras

-- 2 --
$480
Sigma
10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

-- 3 --
$550
Tokina
12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX II Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital Cameras

-- 4 --
$650
Sigma
10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM Autofocus Zoom Lens For Canon Cameras

-- 5 --
$820
CanonUSA
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens

-- 6 --
$950
Sigma
12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG ASP HSM Wide-Angle Zoom Lens (For Canon)

B+H link to all of this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...22&srtclk=sort

 

[darth maul]

www.keh.com 6 month warranty on used stuff.

 

[CptObvious]

The Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 is probably the best bang for the buck. Sharper than the Tamron 10-24 and almost as good as the Canon but ~$340 cheaper.

That being said, ultra-wide angle lenses are really meant for landscapes, not people. You'll get noticeable distortion even with lens correction software and people on the edges of the frame will look smeared. Unless there's a reason to be stuck in that 12x12 room, go outside. Another option would be to get a tripod with a panning ballhead, take two quick shots with your 18-55 and stitch them together.

 

[corkyg]

. . . Another option would be to get a tripod with a panning ballhead, take two quick shots with your 18-55 and stitch them together.

I was just going to suggest the very same thing. It does require that subjects hold their pose uless you are able to find a dividing line devoid of people.

 

[GoSharks]

Don't use an ultrawide for people.

And that is only 24mm equiv.

 

[alfa147x]

Time to go Full Frame

 

[mchammer187]

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 an option?

http://www.adorama.com/TN1116EOS.htm...m_source=gbase

$659 and a bonus is it is fast and constant f2.8 so it is very good indoors

 

[AkumaX]

tokina 11-16mm!

if you think 15mm is good enough, i'd highly recommend the 15-85mm

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Don't use an ultrawide for people.

And that is only 24mm equiv.

I don't get it. Is there something bad about this picture?

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

tokina 11-16mm!

if you think 15mm is good enough, i'd highly recommend the 15-85mm

I can not lie. The 15-85 would be an option. I actually did consider it but my real problem right now is birthday party type shots.

That lense has some benfits. And it would be a much better walk around lense.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 an option?

http://www.adorama.com/TN1116EOS.htm...m_source=gbase

$659 and a bonus is it is fast and constant f2.8 so it is very good indoors

I'll have to rethink this ??-20 minimum requirement in my head.

Interesting:

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

A bigger list of lenses:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...np=&mxp=899.99

 

[GoSharks]

I don't get it. Is there something bad about this picture?

Super unflattering to people on the edges of the frame. Critical people will not like how the photos turn out.

 

[AkumaX]

I can not lie. The 15-85 would be an option. I actually did consider it but my real problem right now is birthday party type shots.

That lense has some benfits. And it would be a much better walk around lense.

flash

 

[Anubis]

I don't get it. Is there something bad about this picture?

ultrawides stretch the perspective at the edges can make people look strange, can only fix so much of it in PP