Flash or 50mm 1.4

[wdt2000]

We are looking for something to take family/kid photos indoors. Which would work better a flash for our EF 24-105mm L & 100mm Macro or getting a 50mm 1.4?

Thanks
Will

 

[Wolverine]

Depending on how mobile they are, you may need a flash.
However, I hate using a flash unless absolutely necessary. I have the 50mm f/1.4, and I think I've used the flash on my camera maybe twice in the last year.

 

[tyoberg]

A good speedlight that will allow you to bounce flash makes an enormous difference. The onboard flash gives photos that nasy point-and-shoot look.

50mm f/1.4 will make more shots possible, but you're still going to have a pretty low shutter speed indoors at night, and will have a razor thin depth of focus (you'll still get a high number of blurry kid photos).

 

[IPT]

even with the F1.4 you will not have the ability to fill shadows that occur from natural light if not dead on. I love my speed light and too avoid the P&S blown out totally lit up look I always dial the exposure compenstion down. It leaves a very natural and even lit subject. My vote would be the speedlight with those two lenses. I have the 480 myself. It would be nice to bounce it and I do have an off the camera cord but admitidly have not used it yet. I don't do people much though.

 

[terahz]

If price is the major factor here, for the price of the Canon 50mm f1.4 you can get a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a flash (like 430ex) and have some change left. That being said I have the f1.4 and a 580 II. If I had to choose between the two and having your lenses I'd get the flash. No lens can substitute for good light.

Add a another $50 for a wireless trigger and a 40" umbrella and you're all set for portraits with your 100mm macro

Cheers

 

[t5Nitro]

I'd take the flash as well with what you currently have.

I have a 430EXII flash. I rarely use it but when I do the results are nice. For me anyway it takes me 3-5 shots to get the correct exposure with it. I'm sure there is some technique to it.

 

[Jacob D]

With a fast prime you can get great shots in low ambient light. The key is shooting at high iso and getting the exposure right. If you have, say, an XSi, T1i, 40D, 50D, 5D, or better... you can shoot at iso 1600 and still have a relatively clean image.

Bounce flash is over rated. Why? It produces flat lighting and, usually, raccoon eyes. Sometimes the flat light is ok, but if used all the time your images will end up with the same flat light look. Shadows add depth and capture the mood of the scene. By using your spot meter and exposing for the shadows you can ensure that shadow detail is still captured. It's true that focusing at f1.8 and below can be tricky, but you build your skill the more you practice. Inside the house wide aperture is usually better anyway so all the clutter is lost in the background.

I shoot a lot of candid moments at home with our kids and my wife. I do own a 580ex but I rarely use it for these type of shots. I usually don't post them on the web, but if it helps I can dig up a shot or two where use of flash would have ruined the moment.

 

[terahz]

You can still get depth and shadows with a flash, just have to bounce it the right way. Adding a gel will also add warmth to the light. I agree the 50 1.4 is a good lens and at high iso you can get great pics, but given the fact the op has already two great lenses a flash will complement his system better.

just my $0.02

 

[Wolverine]

If price is the major factor here, for the price of the Canon 50mm f1.4 you can get a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a flash (like 430ex) and have some change left.

I would read the reviews of the f/1.8 before buying it. The f/1.4 has a much more solid bill. I talked to someone who had the f/1.8 basically fall apart when she was putting it on her camera (interestingly, a few days ago I was talking to someone who knew someone else who had the same thing happen).

 

[terahz]

Yes, it is poor construction and it doesn't have USM focus, but optically the lens is really good being almost 4 times cheaper than the 1.4. Don't get me wrong I highly recommend the f1.4 (the on I have), just saying the 1.8 shouldn't be dismissed when price is a big factor.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/150/cat/10

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/140/cat/10

side by side shootout:
http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

 

[IPT]

You can still get depth and shadows with a flash, just have to bounce it the right way. Adding a gel will also add warmth to the light. I agree the 50 1.4 is a good lens and at high iso you can get great pics, but given the fact the op has already two great lenses a flash will complement his system better.

just my $0.02

I totally agree with this..especially the last part.

As for the 1.8 vs the 1.4 I have both. The 1.8 admitidly is of a lowe quality regarding it's build and feel. If I remember correctly it doesn't have focus distances on the barrel either which if you want to pre-set can be an issue. Anyway, I am not nice to my gear and also often shoot in freezing cold conditions (-20 degrees F) and have never had any issues with the F.18 lens. I only got the F1.4 because I am shooting the Aurora, had some money and wanted as much speed as I could get. Your milage may vary, but that has been my experience this far.

 

[Jacob D]

You can still get depth and shadows with a flash, just have to bounce it the right way. Adding a gel will also add warmth to the light. I agree the 50 1.4 is a good lens and at high iso you can get great pics, but given the fact the op has already two great lenses a flash will complement his system better.

just my $0.02

Guys... a lot of things are possible with the right equipment and careful setup and execution. There is rarely the occasion to think much less make the necessary adjustments when trying to capture moments that come and go in a matter of seconds.