Flash

[KmH]

I just have the kit lens. I want a lens good for doing pics of people, 18-35mm 1:3.-5.6 Is. Thanks for all the help

It's best to have a selection of lenses to take photos of people.

The 50 mm f/1.8 you were referred to is inexpensive. It is inexpensive because it is cheaply made (low build quality). Thought the Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II has fairly good optics, other mechanical parts in the lens (the lens aperture blades) diminish the visual quality of the lenses Circle of Confusion (CoC) Circle of confusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A 50 mm focal length lens is at the short end of the focal length range needed to do portraiture. Prime lenses of 85 mm , 105 mm, and 200 mm are also used.

Many amateur and pro portrait shooters use a 70-200 mm zoom lens - Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

 

[bazooka]

I don't think it's good to buy a lens only because it's affordable. If you never used it, it would still be a waste of space and money. If you are taking group shots, especially indoors, the 50 is going to be too long. I agree with Patrick that a 35mm would be more versatile. But for head & shoulders single or even couples' portraits, if I have enough room to back up, I will definitely use the 50mm 1.4 as it's the sharpest lens in my bag. It's almost 4x more expensive than the 1.8, but you can find them used for a little over $300. Worth it if, and only if, you use it.

Here's what you should do. Set your kit lens (18-55mm, not 18-35mm) on 50mm and leave it there. Take some photos of people or whatever, like you normally would. Do you find you have enough room? Does walking around to frame the shot bother you? Do you *need* the extra speed/sharpness?

Buying an off-camera light system is going to go MUCH further toward improving your photos than a different lens. You could put together a respectable manual one light off camera system for as much as you'd pay for a canon or sigma 1.4.

How serious about photography are you?
How much work do you want to put into it?
How much are you willing to invest?
What sort of "people" shots are wanting to do? Single natural light portraits, lit portraits, business portraits, weddings, party shots, fashion, sports, families, newborn.... there are a LOT of people categories.

 

[KmH]

It's my understanding that she just wants to make photos of her kids.

 

[cccott3]

I don't think it's good to buy a lens only because it's affordable. If you never used it, it would still be a waste of space and money. If you are taking group shots, especially indoors, the 50 is going to be too long. I agree with Patrick that a 35mm would be more versatile. But for head & shoulders single or even couples' portraits, if I have enough room to back up, I will definitely use the 50mm 1.4 as it's the sharpest lens in my bag. It's almost 4x more expensive than the 1.8, but you can find them used for a little over $300. Worth it if, and only if, you use it.

Here's what you should do. Set your kit lens (18-55mm, not 18-35mm) on 50mm and leave it there. Take some photos of people or whatever, like you normally would. Do you find you have enough room? Does walking around to frame the shot bother you? Do you *need* the extra speed/sharpness?

Buying an off-camera light system is going to go MUCH further toward improving your photos than a different lens. You could put together a respectable manual one light off camera system for as much as you'd pay for a canon or sigma 1.4.

How serious about photography are you?
How much work do you want to put into it?
How much are you willing to invest?
What sort of "people" shots are wanting to do? Single natural light portraits, lit portraits, business portraits, weddings, party shots, fashion, sports, families, newborn.... there are a LOT of people categories.

I am serious about learning. I don't want to spend a too much money. I would love to be able to take pictures of my baby and my family members kids and for them to look profession (or at-least close). I have a Large game room upstairs with basically nothing in it that I can take pictures in.

 

[cccott3]

One if the problems with my pictures is the flash. I set up two umbrella light flash things that were given to to me. Bo clue what they are called? Anyway I am taking pics of my friends baby tomorrow afternoon and I'm not sure where to put them and what distance above the baby to put them? Help

 

[kundalini]

Anyway I am taking pics of my friends baby tomorrow afternoon and I'm not sure where to put them and what distance above the baby to put them? Help

Don't make the child suffer. You should practice and practice and practice some more before you put a person in front of the camera. I used stuffed animals for a long time to understand lighting and how to manipulate it.

 

[PatrickJamesYu]

What price ranges did you find?
Id personally go with the Canon 50mm 1.8
The fact that it is a dedicated brand is a huge plus to me. (Canon lens on Canon body)
In general, understand as Canon's optics being far more superior than Sigma.
If this is your first lens purchase and depending on your level, the extra .4 in your f stop isn't too necessary.

 

[katerolla]

Get yourself a canon 50mm 1.8 its only about $120 and get a cheap ebay reflector, that should do you till you can afford a good flash

 

[cccott3]

Don't make the child suffer. You should practice and practice and practice some more before you put a person in front of the camera. I used stuffed animals for a long time to understand lighting and how to manipulate it.

I did use a stuffed animal today and play with where to put the lights today. She is a only a couple weeks old so I don't think she will mind I'm gonna go ahead and give it a shot it's not like I'm getting paid or she thinks I'm a pro..I think it will help me.

 

[subscuck]

In general, understand as Canon's optics being far more superior than Sigma.

Wrong. I suggest you spend some time reading lens reviews for a better understanding

 

[PatrickJamesYu]

In general, understand as Canon's optics being far more superior than Sigma.

Wrong. I suggest you spend some time reading lens reviews for a better understanding

Will do
I've only looked in to Nikon and Zeiss

 

[KmH]

the extra .4 in your f stop isn't too necessary.

The extra .4 is worth 2/3 of a stop, but to a certain degree you're right.

You're right because many people think the lens aperture is the only factor that blurs a background. It's not.

Four factors control how blurred a background gets (depth-of-field, DOF):

1. lens focal length
2. focus point distance from the image sensor
3. focus point to background distance
4. lens aperture

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I bought a "bargain" 35mm G f1.8 lens. Loved it, me being a nooB and the pics being sharp. I did wonder what the colored spots were in a few of the pics but got rid of some of it in PP, and what was left I just shrugged my shoulders.

Then KmH explained about aberation and sent me a link for me to see it for myself. Within 24 hours that lens was on craigslist and sold.

For some reason my new "better quality" Nikon 24-70 lens isn't acting that way........let me go on record for saying I'll do without before I go down the bargain road again