Best Lens for Baby Pictures.

[Magijr]

I am expecting my first child 10/20/12, and I recently purchased my first dslr, an EOS Rebel t4i. The only lens I currently own is the lens that came with the camera, the 15-55mm. I am looking for help with what lens to choose next. Most of the pictures I am looking to take for the next 6-12 months are still portraits of the baby and the family, however I would also like a lens that can grow with the child.

I have done some research and I think that the reviews on The-Digital-Picture.com site are great, the only problem I have is that there are so many choices ranging from a couple hundred dollars to a couple thousand.

What lens do you all recommend? Do I need to purchase a couple lens? Is it worth my investment to buy a premium L series lens?

Sorry for all the questions

Thank you for your help,
Bruce

[Steph]

Welcome Magijr

When I was in your case a few years ago, I bought the 17-55 f/2.8. You'll shoot mostly indoors at the beginning and you'll appreciate the 2 stops difference as that will allow you to stay at 1/60 without increasing the ISO too much. Also 55mm is not much (88 mm in 35mm) but I found it sufficient.

Don't forget to post pictures of your little wonder when the time comes!

[Joel Eade]

Alot depends on your budget. The very best image quality will likely come from an L series prime lens but, as you pointed out, there is a great variety of choices. I just recently purchased the 35mm f/1.4L in anticipation of our first grandchild's birth. It is a fabulous lens that works extremely well in low light without a flash. It is very sharp out to the edges. Overall a great lens but pricey. I have also seen great results from the 24-70mm f/2.8L which you could also use down the road for indoor sports or stage performances. Many many options...what is your budget?

[Joel Eade]

? Is it worth my investment to buy a premium L series lens?

Bruce

In my opinion yes. The image quality is top notch and, so far, they hold their value over time due to the price increases that Canon has instituted. I just recently sold a 4 year old 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM for exactly what I paid for it.

[HDNitehawk]

I would go with this, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I like the 17-55mm for the use you describe, especially since many of your shots will be indoors.

That answers your first question.

Second, do you need a couple of lenses? If you just want pictures of your baby you don’t “need” a couple of lenses. But if you enjoy photography and want creative pictures you might “want” a couple of lenses. Later on you might want a telephoto take pictures at sports and events. You could very easily get by with a good telephoto zoom and the 17-55mm.

Third asked is L lenses worth the investment, probably not unless you are a professional photographer, it really isn't an investment unless you plan on having a monetary gain. Investment is a word we use to convince ourselves we are making a good purchase. Sure they have really good resale. But again if you enjoy photography it is worth buying L lenses for your own satisfaction. For a telephoto zoom I have to say yes it is worth buying an L lens over the Non L lenses available. For the 17-55mm it is good enough and you will get comparable IQ to an L lens.

[Jayson]

I was super picky with my kids shots and you can get all of the pictures you want with either the 50mm f/1.4 or something the like. I would suggest you get the 40mm pancake lens for your baby shots. That way, you also have the ability to use it in video and have autofocus during your videos. You little one isn't going to move too much at all for the first couple months, they will just sit there and look cute. Therefore, you don't need the top of the line lens for chasing them around. You can look into that sometime down the road. The 40mm gives you great image quality and is very portable on your camera. On top of that, it has a very good minimum focus distance, so you can get those detail shots that you want. If you have a little room, you can get good family shots of 3 or 4 people with the 40mm. Here is the Amazon link. Here's Bryan's review.

You can use your 15-55mm for the big family shots, just make sure you have plenty of window light.

[Jayson]

I don't have any baby pictures with this as my babies are growing fast, but I did get this one with the pancake yesterday. The lens is sharp and focuses very accurately in my experience. I just got the lens earlier this month.



He's chipmunking watermelon.

[cls]

Hi, I got Sigma 30/1.4 a few months ago and it has become my favorite portrait lens. If you like portraits that aren't too tight (half/full body), I highly recommend it for a Rebel series camera body (crop sensor). At the really wide apertures that a fast prime can provide you can get a dreamy blurred look that goes well with baby portaits. (I'm sure the Canon 35/1.4 L is better, but it's a lot bulkier and the pricetag is scary.)

[Magijr]

Thank you for the suggestions, I will certainly take that lens into consideration and post a PIC as soon as he's here

[Magijr]

Thank you for the reply. I really do not have a budget (my wife cant see this can she? LOL) , I would rather buy a lens that I will have for many years and take the best quality pictures. I am going to take a course in photography in the Fall to lean about the camera and the lens that I choose and get the most out of both.

Do you think the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens is a crazy purchase, or a good investment?

Thank you again, Bruce