Good lens for baby portraits?

[Philligan]

The Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II fortunately has some decent optics. Canon should be embarrassed that the build quality of that lens is so poor.
DON'T DROP a Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II. It will likely break into 2 large, non-repairable, pieces. There are thousands of broken Canon 50 mm f/1.8 lens photos all over the Internet, all broken in the same part of the lens.

While it can deliver a nice shallow depth-of-field, the quality of the blurred background the 50 mm f/1.8 II delivers is jittery and very nervous looking. which detracts a lot from an image.
That jittery and very nervous looking blurred background is mainly caused because the lens has only 5, straight, sharp edged aperture blades that create a pentagonal shaped lens aperture.
Most pro grade lenses have 9, curved, rounded edge lens aperture blades, which make the lens aperture almost exactly round so a lens delivers nice, pleasing to the eye, creamy smooth blurred backgrounds.

This. Mine fell from a coffee table to a wooden floor, and broke. Not into pieces, but the barrel was all cockeyed. I thought it was a write off, but it still sort of works, it just has trouble at the far ends of the focus range. Still, for ~$100, I'd get another one if I had a little extra money, just for a backup lens, or one that I can use if I'm scared to bring my 50/1.4.

Honestly, though, I don't find the blur to be that bad. I took a picture with my 1.4 at f/1.8, and the 1.8 at f/1.8, and the difference is hard to notice - I'd probably be guessing in a blind test.

 

[Rosy]

A picture is a meal, and a lens is only a spoon.

You already have a spoon. Learn to cook with it.

Wow.....well stated

 

[Derrel]

A picture is a meal, and a lens is only a spoon.

You already have a spoon. Learn to cook with it.

First-world problems...

 

[raventepes]

Sigma's 17-50 and 50-150 (both) f/2.8 are worth a look. For the price of both of them, you could buy 1 Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II with cash to spare.

I like the 17-50 and the 50-150 for a couple of reasons. First off, they're sharp. Their IQ is just outstanding. Secondly, they're built with APS-C in mind and give an equivalent angle of view for crop sensor as compared to a 24-70 and 70-200 on a full frame.

Just a suggestion. I'm not much of a prime lens shooter though. I like the flexibility of zooms, especially when I'm in the studio.

I ran across this site, Pixel Peeper, a while ago. It gives you options for various body and lens combinations so you can judge for yourself if a lens is what you want. It's not perfect by any means, as you can't filter they type of photography you're after. Also, sometimes they just can't come up with certain combinations, but it's a good start. Over a million full-size sample photos from SLR and mirrorless cameras combined with different lenses