This is to all the baby/kid/family photographers out there...

I am starting my own little business doing baby/family portraits and need some new equipment. I have a 30D and am wanting to get a couple new lenses. Which would you guys suggest is best? I aim for the lowest aperture setting I can, and love the blurred out backgrounds. OH yea and I always use natural lighting.

I was told the Canon 50/1.4, 60/2.8 Macro USM, 100/2.8 Macro USM, and the 24-70 2.8 L (expensive one) are the best... according to the sales clerk at Roberts Camera. Are the L lenses really worth the money?

I need to reseach the types more, but I was hoping to get some feedback on which lenses you guys prefer?

Thanks!!

Morgan

Parents like details. Feet, fingers, hands... anything. The best lens for that job is the 100mm f/2.8 macro. But you also need to capture the babies environment. Baby sleeping in crib with name on the wall. Mom or dad giving baby a bath in the sink or tub. A lot of times, these areas are cramped. A wide angle lens is good for these areas. Amber uses her 17-55mm almost exclusively on her baby shoots. But her lens is Nikon. Canon's equivalent EF-S lens... isn't so much an equivalent. I've read really bad reviews on it and some satisfactory reviews on it. Get the 16-35mm. It's expensive but it gives you that extra width that the 24-70mm just can't. But if you could get both lenses... get 'em. Canon's L series glass is amazing. Get the good stuff. You won't regret your investment.

Edit: The 50 1.4 is good in low situations like when the baby is sleeping and you need a couple more stops. But good luck getting a sharp picture at f/1.4. I only know one guy that can do it. It's built soooo much better than the 50 1.8. So even if you only use it at 1.8, I'd still recommend getting the 1.4. Good luck!

Lenses I use for baby portraits: 50mm 1.4, 100mm 2.8 macro, 24mm 1.4L.

The 50 is inexpensive, unobtrusive and produces beautiful images. The 100mm is 'slow' for a prime, but is razor sharp and can focus close up on those little toes and fingers. the 24L focuses close for fun close/wide shots highlighting a body part but still showing plenty of background.

I've used a lot of different gear over the last couple years (both Canon and Nikon and several brands of lenses) and yes, Canon lenses are worth the money for me...

Hope that helps!

~Bill

Edit: Oh, ya, I use a 5D for these shoots, so 24mm is wide, for a 30D the 16-35mm might be a better choice, and used ones can be had now that the new one is out.... (and you don't need the new one on a 30D, it's improvements are all aimed at full frame).

I agree. I just purchased a 16-35L and I LOVE it. (The 16-35 and 70-200 at the same time was quite a big...."investment"! but soooo worth it) I also use the 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 instead of its nicer siblings but they're amazing too!

Thanks so much guys!! Looks like a might put a dent in my wallet! Keep me posted on anynew ones I NEED to have and I want a 5D so bad! I have to save up some money first.

Thanks again!!

Keep us posted on your new business! Good luck!

I shot for a long time with only the wide (17-40) and long (70-200) ends covered with good glass. I had a 50 I personally rarely used since many of my clients are the 2-4 range where the zoom is a godsend. I got the 24-70 a few months back and I can't imagine how I lived without the thing. I'll do whole sessions without taking it off.

I suppose it depends on your style too. I shoot pretty tight and only have a few truly wide shots per session, so the 24-70 allows me to go from full length body to close up face without changing lenses or repositioning too much. I love the clarity of primes, but I don't like working with kids and primes. Babies are easier cause they're wiggly but not truly mobile.

For all of my baby pictures, I use either the 17-55 or the 85/1.8. I use the 85 for all my "parts" images but with a Nikon 5T diopter. I don't think they make them any more but Canon has some good ones.

Occasionally, I'll use a 24-120VR, but I usually use the 17-55.

Come to think of it, at weddings I only use the 17-55 and 85 for most of the time. And for other portraits. Hmm. Maybe I'm in a rut.

My wife is a baby photographer too, these are basically all she uses...50/1.4, 100/2.8 Macro USM, & 24-70 2.8L. In that order. Check out her site if you want, at www.sweetbabyphoto.com There is also a bunch of good resources and groups on flickr too, you'll find her work there also.

She would love to post on here, but she just delivered our new baby boy last night! Good luck!

Whoa!!! Congrats man! What are you doing on OSP?! Go do daddy stuff.

Congrats Louis on the new baby boy!! Thanks to all of you for the advice! I will keep you posted on what I decide to do