Best Lens for Baby Pictures.

[Magijr]

Thank you very much for all your information. You suggested the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS which seems to be the leading lens from the current forum.

I did not realize the flash was so important, I am now going to research the suggested flashes and most likely purchase with a lens to avoid the direct light, great input... thank you.

My budget is flexible; I just to make sure I purchase the right lens at the right price and get the most out of the lens and camera.

By the way, the pictures of your daughter are wonderful and I will certainly share when my child arrives sometime in late October.

Thank you again and I'll keep you posted.

Bruce

[ahab1372]

I agree with the 17-55. My neighbor has it and it hardly ever leaves the camera. I personally got the EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 instead because I preferred the greater focal length range over the constant 2.8 aperture, but my kids are older and most of my pictures are outside. With a newborn I suppose you will take more pictures inside where the larger max aperture will be a greater advantage. It will also allow more nice background blur.
I would also add an external flash before you add a tele, the 430EX II is a great choice. It makes a huge difference over the built-in flash.

Arnt

[Magijr]

I agree with the 17-55. My neighbor has it and it hardly ever leaves the camera. I personally got the EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 instead because I preferred the greater focal length range over the constant 2.8 aperture, but my kids are older and most of my pictures are outside. With a newborn I suppose you will take more pictures inside where the larger max aperture will be a greater advantage. It will also allow more nice background blur.
I would also add an external flash before you add a tele, the 430EX II is a great choice. It makes a huge difference over the built-in flash.

Arnt

"Thank you for your information, I am going to now purchase an external flash, another response suggested the same flash, the 430 EX II. Thank you again."

[Magijr]

Thank you all for your input, suggestions and advice.

Does anyone have an opinion on the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens?

Is this aperture too low for indoor photography?

[HDNitehawk]

Thank you all for your input, suggestions and advice.

Does anyone have an opinion on the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens?

Is this aperture too low for indoor photography?

The 17-55mm F/2.8 will be better indoors. IMO I would say the 24-105 would be a better outdoor lens than indoor.

[Magijr]

The 17-55mm F/2.8 will be better indoors. IMO I would say the 24-105 would be a better outdoor lens than indoor.

Thank you for your feedback.

[neuroanatomist]

The 17-55mm F/2.8 will be better indoors. IMO I would say the 24-105 would be a better outdoor lens than indoor.

+1. 24mm on APS-C is often not wide enough indoors, where you can't back up if you need a wider FoV. IMO, the 24-105L is another lens that delivers a more useful range on FF than APS-C. I did use it on my 7D when I wanted a weather-sealed combo for shooting in the rain, but otherwise the 17-55mm was the lens I'd grab first on APS-C.

[ahab1372]

Neuro mentioned the EF 85mm f/1.8 which I also liked a lot when I tried it

[Steph]

As a first lens for the first months of your little guy, I wouldn't advice the 70-200. I have the 70-200 f/2.8 L II IS and on my 7D, you can forget about it indoor. OK, perhaps the houses are smaller here in Europe. If you're afraid or see that the 55 end of the 17-55 is a bit too short, you can by a 85 f/1.8 which is not too expensive. Later, when he will be running in the garden, you can think about your first white lens. This is of course assuming you only want baby pictures.

[Magijr]

Thank you for your input.