Looking at a new lens for 6D

[RRAM]

I have been using EF 40 f/28 and EF 50 f/1.8 on 6D for about a year now and I was thinking about getting a new lens. My main subject is my 2 year old son. I am not able to decide if should be getting zoom or a prime lens. I like the prime lens for their size. These are the three lenses I was thinking of EF 20mm f/2.8 (US $431.99) or EF 24-70 F4L (US$799) or 17-40 F4L (US$ 671.99) (Refurbished from canon.)

[Polar01]

Ram I would suggest the 24-70mm lens, as your son gets older he will be moving around more and at a farther distance to you. With a wide angle you will have to run around after him trying to jam the camera and lens in his face as you want to get close enough to take the shot. Actually I would like to be around watching you try capture a close up of you son at three or older as he rounds around out side in a play ground I think capturing that image would be a hoot, so in that instance go for the 20mm. So I suggest the 24-70mm for you to shoot images of your son for yourself, and the 20mm for images of you trying to shoot you son with it for us.

Cheers: Allan

[inkista]

This is just me, but if you're willing to shop used and give up a bit of image quality for added reach, I'd say look for a used EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM (B&H has one in 8+ condition for $719). The 24-70 f/4L IS USM is probably a bit nicer optically at the 24mm end, but most folks get a 24-70L to get an f/2.8 lens. The 24-105 is the 5D/6D kit lens for a reason. It's a very good match, and if you're typically using the 35-50 range, the performance difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 f/4L lenses isn't going to be that great.

I will warn you, though, that f/4, low light, and a fast moving subject isn't a great combination, even with IS. You may want to consider adding a flash.

[DanK]

What do you want the lens to do for you? What should it do that your current lenses don't do? Unless you specify that, it will be hard to give you good advice.

Personally, I would almost never want something shorter than 40mm for candids of kids. In addition to the issue that Allan raised--having to get very close--wide angle lenses don't provide a very flattering perspective. Telephotos flatten because they increase the working distance; wide angles do the reverse, leading to bulbous noses, etc. One can use any length for portraits, but the conventional portrait range for FF cameras is perhaps 70-105mm. I just looked at a few of my recent candids of toddlers and young kids, and they were all in the range of 80 to 105mm.

Consistent with Kathy's suggestions, my standard candid setup for kids indoors is a 24-105 with bounced flash and a bounce card (Demb Flip-It). It has precisely the focal length range that I most often want. There are several 24-70 lenses that are optically superior, but given that I often shoot kids at more than 70mm, this works fine for me.

[William W]

A few general points:

> A zoom is going to be more flexible than a Prime.

> The main Subject of your Photography is your son, I understand, and maybe the reason for buying the camera, but a zoom is likely to allow you to develop as a Photographer more quickly and also allow you to investigate Subjects that you might not have, yet.

> Your son is only going to get older: and move more quickly and play outside, perhaps take up a sport or activity – small at first, just running around the garden chasing the bird that he will never catch – a Zoom will allow a FL compass that will allow you to NOT to have to run at the same speed framing him in the shot, but more importantly allow you to choose a Camera Viewpoint and concentrate on the shot and the expression on his face and not worry about tripping over the scooter or garden hose . . . etc.

> You mention size of the lens: the EF 24 to 105 F/4 L IS USM, is only a fraction longer (about ½ inch) and a fraction heavier (about 2 ounces) than the EF 24 to 70 F/4 IS USM and it has an extra tele-photo reach.

*

My bottom line is for you to consider Kathy’s recommendation seriously as there are many good reasons why the 24-105 is bundled with the 6D.

The EF 24 to 105/4 IS USM is a good lens and more importantly a versatile lens, for candid Portraiture on a 5D~6D series camera:


Young Girl and Her Dog - Venice, Italy 2012

WW

[RRAM]

The reason I was looking at wide angle zoom or standard zoom is with winter coming it would be mostly indoor play areas where we would be taking him. In our recent trip to the aquarium even 40mm sometime was little too tight. I am open to used and refurbished lens and I currently have a 430EXII flash which I still learning to use. I was looking 24-70 f/4 is because Canon 24-70 f/2.8 is out of my budget and I am not sure how good are Tamron and Sigma 24-70 lens are read mixed reviews about them. Future plan was to get a 70-200 or 70-300.

[Glenn NK]

What do you want the lens to do for you? What should it do that your current lenses don't do? Unless you specify that, it will be hard to give you good advice.

Personally, I would almost never want something shorter than 40mm for candids of kids. In addition to the issue that Allan raised--having to get very close--wide angle lenses don't provide a very flattering perspective. Telephotos flatten because they increase the working distance; wide angles do the reverse, leading to bulbous noses, etc. One can use any length for portraits, but the conventional portrait range for FF cameras is perhaps 70-105mm. I just looked at a few of my recent candids of toddlers and young kids, and they were all in the range of 80 to 105mm.

Consistent with Kathy's suggestions, my standard candid setup for kids indoors is a 24-105 with bounced flash and a bounce card (Demb Flip-It). It has precisely the focal length range that I most often want. There are several 24-70 lenses that are optically superior, but given that I often shoot kids at more than 70mm, this works fine for me.

I was just going to suggest the same approach - I take a few shots of my grand-daughters.

The range of the 24-105 didn't come about by accident - the designers well knew that it would be very effective.

And I will also second Dan's comments about portraits - once upon a time, the "standard" FL for portraits was about 80 mm. At this focal length, the photographer was forced to get back to a distance that:
1) didn't threaten the subject by being close,
2) didn't distort facial features by being too close.

The wisdom still holds.

Glenn

[Scott Stephen]

Hi,

I will agree on the 24-105. Look at canonpricewatch.com for the best price. Dealers often break out the included kit lens 24-105 from a camera+ lens bundle and sell the lens in a white box for super cheap. It is a good lens with a really useful focal length, and IS.

If you didn't already have two bright to bright-ish primes, I would have recommended a Sigma Art f/1.4 35mm but it would be redundant as heck with your 40 and 50!



If you

[TobyMac]

I had this same question about a year and a bit ago. Most people pointed me to the 24-105 and I ended up getting it. It is always in my bag and one of the most versatile lenses I have ever used. Nice and sharp and also not too heavy for what you get, highly recommend it.

[RRAM]

Thank you for suggestions. For now i have a used 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 at very good price. Which i will use for a sometime to come see how that works for me.