1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

prime for indoor children pics

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by citan, Jan 2, 2013.

  1. citan

    citan Mu-43 Rookie

    22
    Jul 24, 2011
    Piscataway, NJ
    hi guys,
    Im a beginner that just picked up a G3 kit.
    I wanted to get a lens for low light, indoor pics of my little kids w/o flash.
    With the kit lens, the pics either get blurred or under exposed.
    I was trying to decide if 14mm 2.5 was fast enough, or would i need the
    20mm?
    Also, is there a big difference between the kit 3.5 at 14mm and the prime 14 2.5?
    how about the difference between f1.7 vs f2.5?

    thanks
     
  2. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    My recommendation if you're looking for an indoor lens to use without flash is the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4, if you can fit it in your budget.

    The 14mm f/2.5 probably won't be fast enough for indoor pics in a lot of situations without flash, especially on the G3 where I wouldn't want to push ISO above 1600 if I didn't have to. The 20mm is an excellent lens, but has much slower AF due that will be a liability working with moving subjects indoors. The 14 and 20 are both great lenses and I have no concerns recommending them generally, but I think for your specifically stated purpose the PL 25mm may be a better choice.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. McDark

    McDark Mu-43 Regular

    82
    Oct 26, 2011
    Russia
    25 1/1.4 is excellent for low light and wide enough for the purpose. 20 mm has slow focusing motor and too wide to my taste.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. tuanies

    tuanies Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Jun 13, 2011
    Graham, WA
    Tuan Huynh
    The 25mm F/1.4 is the sole lens I use for indoor shots of my kid. I've never had to fire off the flash, ever.

    This is with dim lighting at the in laws and more shots on my flickr.

    8311867548_b02845a8b6.
    Christmas Eve 2012 by tuanies, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. zucchiniboy

    zucchiniboy Mu-43 Regular

    135
    Oct 13, 2010
    San Francisco
    Plus one for the 25mm. I have the 14 and 20 as well, but since I got the 25, it's been pretty much that for indoor kid pics. Worth the cost.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. shepx13

    shepx13 Mu-43 Regular

    196
    Aug 7, 2012
    Tyler, TX
    Ken
    +1 again for the 25 1.4. You'll love it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. erb3742

    erb3742 Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Oct 3, 2012
    Southern California
    Eric
    Another for the 25mm, took 90% of the shots indoors of the little ones running around over the holidays. Used to have the 20 and found the AF to be too slow.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. fransglans

    fransglans Mu-43 Top Veteran

    991
    Jun 12, 2012
    Sweden
    gus
    I had the 25 and sold it for the 20. People say that AF misses with the 20. My experience is that the pl 25 wont catch a moving object (child) indoor anyway. If youre going to get a nice pic of kids etc, they need to be still for a fraction of a second and with that time the af of the pany 20 is fast enough. I havent got any BIG problem to photograph my three small children this christmas. And I also prefer the focal length of the 20 indoors, much more versatile. Besides this, the pl25 is a better lens in iq.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. citan

    citan Mu-43 Rookie

    22
    Jul 24, 2011
    Piscataway, NJ
    thanks for the quick responses, the 25 is probably out of my budget, and i prefer a pancake lens.

    How much of a difference in lowlight would the 14mm be vs the 20mm? Its hard to resist the cheap deals on ebay for the 14mm.
     
  10. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    It may help if you look at this in terms of exposure settings. Going from f/2.5 to f/3.5 is about a stop difference. That means you can get one stop lower ISO (1600 instead of 3200 for example), or one stop faster shutter speed (1/120 instead of 1/60) for the same exposure.

    Moving to f/1.7 or is a bit over a stop faster than that, and f/1.4 another 2/3 of a stop or so faster yet, so you can extrapolate out and see what you'd be working with with each lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. citan

    citan Mu-43 Rookie

    22
    Jul 24, 2011
    Piscataway, NJ
    jloden,
    thanks, that makes sense. So right now i can shoot at 1600 iso, but my shutter speed isnt fast enough to capture a non blurred image that has enough exposure. So im guessing i need at least 1/100 to capture a kid indoor, with a max iso of 1600, so 1.7 maybe what i need?
     
  12. InlawBiker

    InlawBiker Mu-43 Veteran

    218
    Feb 1, 2012
    Seattle, WA
    Greg
    I would look at the 25 f/1.4 and 45 f/1.8. There is a big difference between f/2.8 and f/1.8. But mostly I would look at using a flash for indoor shots of kids.

    I'm not exactly a beginner but I'm no expert either. I've always been interested in photography but what really got me going is pictures of my kids. I tried faster lenses (Panasonic 20mm and Oly 45mm) and with good technique you can get great shots.

    With a flash that you can bounce or diffuse you get close to 100% keepers. At the end of the day that's what matters to me.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. savvy

    savvy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    714
    Sep 28, 2012
    SE Essex, UK
    Les
    The 45mm is a fantastic lens, make no mistake, but may be just a tad long to chase fast kids round a small room, unless you have fairly large room(s). It's a great portrait lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. citan

    citan Mu-43 Rookie

    22
    Jul 24, 2011
    Piscataway, NJ
    yes, i notice most of my current pics are at 14mm. 20mm would be doable but 45mm is too tight.
     
  15. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    Depending on what shutter speed you're at now @ ISO 1600, that may be the case, yes.

    FWIW, I have been having better luck getting more "keepers" indoors on moving using higher shutter speeds than in the past, and I've been using between 1/125 and 1/250 a bunch lately with good success for moving people (to include a friend's 4 year old daughter running around :biggrin:)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. savvy

    savvy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    714
    Sep 28, 2012
    SE Essex, UK
    Les
    I don't have the 14mm so can't really comment. I do have the (old) 17mm which is f/2.8, and my 20mm at f/1.7 knocks spots off it indoors.

    If you are comfortable zone focussing and/or back button focussing, the 20mm using these techniques may be the best option for capturing moving kids indoors.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. citan

    citan Mu-43 Rookie

    22
    Jul 24, 2011
    Piscataway, NJ
    hmm zone focusing/back button focusing, im gonna have to look this up, do you mind explaining it to me, thanks!
     
  18. mrjr

    mrjr Mu-43 Top Veteran

    518
    Sep 25, 2012
    If the PL25 isn't in the budget, I'd actually suggest a nice bounce flash--like the Nissin Di466--over a lens purchase. I couldn't count on the 20 to focus fast enough, so I sold it and got the 25. Your kit lens can focus plenty fast, and a bounce flash can light up the room.

    If you have your heart set on a lens, I'd recommend the 14 over the 20. Also, don't be afraid to push your G3 a little bit past ISO 1600. 3200 is definitely noisy, but I was ok with G3 files up to 3200 for web/iPad sharing sizes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    Vin
    +1 for the flash suggestion. If your primary priority for photography is kids indoors, you should learn flash photography. I know a lot of people are adverse to using flash, but hey, you need the right tool for the job.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. fransglans

    fransglans Mu-43 Top Veteran

    991
    Jun 12, 2012
    Sweden
    gus
    I also had the 14 :) sold it. Why. Im into having only one lens for one year. The thing that 14 misses is subject isolation. The dof is too big. So if you want the blurred backgrounds, the 20 for example will be better. The 14 is lighting fast. But 28mm is a little too wide for my taste. Pany 20 takes the best of two worlds with its 40mm fov. And again, considering the af on 20. Bye it second hand and try it for your self, I always believed the reviews of the "terrible af" until I got one by myself. Its not bad. Its workable!
     
    • Like Like x 1