Which lens for indoor cathedral shots?

[RichNY]

Has anyone done much photography in European churches? I'm trying to figure out what lens i will need for my vacation.

The only lens I have faster than my 17-55 f/2.8 is the 85 f/1.8 which will be too long.

Am I better off with a Sigma 30 f/1.4 or a Canon 50 f/1.4 for these types of shots on a 30D? My gut tells me I'm going to want to be shooting as wide as possible but don't want to go thru the expense of purchasing lens like CWs and I haven't seen them for rent anywhere.

[timmciglobal]

17 seems perfect if that's the IS version...

IS + F2.8 + ISO 800/1600.

Tim

[RichNY]

You are probably right- I've been up painting for way too long and not thinking clearly.

I was thinking that the light is much worse there than when I shoot my nephew playing roller hockey with my 2.8 70-200IS. But I failed to take into account that churches tend have a lot less need for stopping action so I could have longer shutter times.

I guess the IS will give me back the 2 stops and I'll be able to get as much hand held light as I would with an f/1.4 lens.

17 seems perfect if that's the IS version...

IS + F2.8 + ISO 800/1600.

Tim

[noyjimi]

Has anyone done much photography in European churches? I'm trying to figure out what lens i will need for my vacation.

The only lens I have faster than my 17-55 f/2.8 is the 85 f/1.8 which will be too long.

Am I better off with a Sigma 30 f/1.4 or a Canon 50 f/1.4 for these types of shots on a 30D? My gut tells me I'm going to want to be shooting as wide as possible but don't want to go thru the expense of purchasing lens like CWs and I haven't seen them for rent anywhere.

I haven't done it, save for a sneaky P&S... anyway, I imagine the same lenses that work on American churches will work. :D just kidding

The 17-55 will be fine, it has IS which gives you 3 extra stops (that church isn't going to be moving, that's for sure :D ). What good will f/1.4 be if the dof won't suit your subject, know what I mean?

[bastetbabe27]

Dear RichNY,

I don't own a dSLR, but I spent 5 months in Italy studying abroad, and I took lots of pictures inside Italian churches with my Panasonic FZ5.

Things to note:
These places are DARK. I don't know exactly where you're going, but Rome (and anywhere farther north) in the winter is frequently cloudy and rainy, and churches rely primarily on sunlight for lighting their interiors. If it's cloudy, or late in the afternoon/early in the morning, it's frequently quite dim. Especially since Italian churches were not built in the Gothic style, with lots of huge windows to let in sunlight. So, you're going to want something fast. How fast may depend on how steady your hands are because....

You may not be allowed to use a tripod, so plan accordingly. The amount of supervision by caretakers generally varies with the particular church--how popular it is with tourists, etc. So small and unobtrusive is better. And no photography of any kind is allowed in the Sistine Chapel, flash or no. (Of course, if you just 'happen' to leave your lens cap off, and just 'happen' to have your camera on and set to the proper settings, and it just 'happens' to be pointing at the ceiling.... ;) )

General tips: The Renaissance Italians did not believe in 'less is more' as a design philosophy. Interesting details abound. Remember to look up. Just because the church doesn't look impressive on the outside, doesn't mean there aren't treasures within. Including people for scale can really increase the 'wow' factor of your pictures. This is especially true of St. Peters. The place is massive (the facade is the size of a football field) but so well proportioned that it looks smaller than it really is.

Hope this helps! And don't forget to enjoy the churches b/c you're so busy trying to get the shot!

- bastetbabe27

P.S. If you want any recommendations of particular places to visit, just PM me.

[forno]

Rich,

I took some pics(iXus 50) in St peters in Rome last june and used 2 metods

1. set to timer mode, compose hit shutter and breath as the shutter releases
2. set to timer, brace camera and/or myself against a wall or door frame

This worked pretty well although there are some compromises as a reult of the lens on the P&S and the position of the bracing point

Should be able to compose better with DSLR lens though

[aparmley]

Rich - I think your 17-55 2.8 IS fits the bill very nicely for indoor church no flash no tripod type of shooting. . .

[some guy]

No tripod or flash allowed in these cathedrals. I used my swivel screen A95 to resting on a pocket size tripod or utilising various ledges to take cathedral shots while in Italy. I find for these type of shots and the constraints imposed, the dSLR is less useful unfortunately.
You can go super wide and run up the ISO to minimise shake.

[jamison55]

I agree with Andy, it doesn't get much better than the 17-55 IS for WA, low light stuff. I suspect I'd find the 17mm's a little too tele, though, so I'd also be packing my Sigma 10-20 to take as much in as I possibly could. At 10mm's you'd be surprised at how slow a SS you can handhold successfully!

[RichNY]

Thanks- I really appreciate everyone's advice.

[forno]

Thanks- I really appreciate everyone's advice.

Enjoy your holiday you lucky bugger:cool:

[bastetbabe27]

forno,

Those are nice shots of St. Peters. It's amazing what a difference a sunny day can make! Every time I was there it was cloudy :( I still got some decent pics, but the place really glows when the sun's out.

-bastetbabe27

[kjosker]

Toured Italy last fall, and you are wise to consider the cathedrals and churches. It's not the religious aspect, it's because the church was life 500 years ago and more. The best of everything went into these places, architecture, art, marterials, etc. And for the most part, most of them are still there, intact.

I took my 20D , 17-40, and 24 f1.4. My original thought was the 17-40 for exterior and bright interiors; the 24 for darker interiors and night shots. By the end of the three week trip, the 24 was on the camera most of the time. I would have like something wider, and when I go back, I think I'll take a 10-22.

Many of the churches have "pay lights" on major art works, such as Michelangelo's "Moses" in St. Peter in Chains in Rome. You put a Euro in a coin box, and the artwork is illuminated for a minute or two. The pay lights are good for at least an extra stop or two. And feel free to take photos on someone elses Euro.

Tripods are generally not permitted; but be creative, steady a shooting hand on a column or pew. Flash may or may not be permitted. Flash is useless when trying to capture detail 70-80 feet above you.

St. Peter's in Rome is recalled as brighter than most, at least the dome and altar areas. That's my recollection anyway.

Now this is a generalization, but it seemed like Rome and Florentine churches were brighter than Venetian. Venetian churches, with the exception of St. Marco, were smaller than others, but no less adorned.

The attached photos are from left to right, top to bottom: St. Peter's, Rome; St. Peter In Chains (Vincoli), Rome; Duomo, Siena; Friari, Venice; Scalzi, Venice.

I hope you have a safe and enjoyable trip.

[aparmley]

I agree with Andy, it doesn't get much better than the 17-55 IS for WA, low light stuff. I suspect I'd find the 17mm's a little too tele, though, so I'd also be packing my Sigma 10-20 to take as much in as I possibly could. At 10mm's you'd be surprised at how slow a SS you can handhold successfully!


Ah yes, indeed Jamie, I failed to see he has a 10-22. I'd be sure to bring that puppy as well - just as Jamie stated. When you run into those situations where IS is required, I think I'd be ok with lossing a little WA for a clear, shake free image.