Opions on best lens for pet photography?

Maybe you think it's a lens all ready in my arsenal but I've been looking to purchase a lens to use mainly for pet photography. I borrowed the nifty fifty the other day for a puppy shoot but was left unimpressed by it's poor focusing in low light. Here's the lenses I've been considering...85 f/1.8, 50 f/1.4, 100 f/2.8 Macro or the EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro.

Interested in your thoughts as to what you think I should be going for? Oh yeah my budget would be stretching it if I went for the 100 Macro so please don't suggest anything above that, temptation is always hard to deal with

PS. Delete 'Opions' insert 'Opinions"

I would say that it depends most on what focal length you like. Personally, I think anything longer than the 50mm would be too long for anything but headshots... or maybe birds and reptiles. I would go for the 50 1.4USM. It will focus well in low light and allow you to do full body shots of larger animals with or without their owners.

I usually use the 24-70 L, although I may well temper it with the 70-200 IS L as the situation requires. Sometimes keeping your distance is the best option, as it doesn't encourage them to head for the lens.

I must admit I am siding towards the 50 f/1.4

What did I say about budget & temptation

Then look at the Sigma/Tamron 24/28-70/75 f/2.8 offerings. Moderately fast and a good range. Unless you or the owner can convince the critter to hold still, you'll be stirring them up as you move towards/away from them as they move away/towards you, so zooming is a big help.

Take a really good look at the 50mm f/1.4.

paulhillion, out of the list of choices that you've provided I would choose and have chosen 50 f/1.4. I bet that the difference is marginal you'll find fans of any of the aforementioned options. I also highly doubt that you'll have someone saying to you not to use any one of them either.

If aforesaid was too coherent or wasn't confusing enough, please let me know and I'll "unsimplify it"

Chancellor.

I always thought the difference between the 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.8 was about build quality. Would you really recommend one to someone who had tried the other and was unhappy with it?

Dogs move. Sometimes fast (you have 24-105). Dogs can be small (you have ideal 70-200). Dogs like to lick wide angle lenses for near-far compositions (you have 10-22).
The 50 f/1.4 focuses slow. The 50 has nil depth of field at low apertures.
You already own enses you for GREAT pet photography. Come'on you just want another lens, right?
Jack

J Rabin wrote:
Dogs move. Sometimes fast (you have 24-105). Dogs can be small (you have ideal 70-200). Dogs like to lick wide angle lenses for near-far compositions (you have 10-22).
The 50 f/1.4 focuses slow. The 50 has nil depth of field at low apertures.
You already own enses you for GREAT pet photography. Come'on you just want another lens, right?
Jack

LOL You got me!

Actually I work in a Jessops store, surrounded by lot's of lenses everyday! At the mo we have all the lenses in stock I mention above, I know I don't really need them but it's oh so difficult! I took a couple of shots with the 85 f/1.8 the other day & was blown away at the quality!

The difference between the 50 1.4 and 1.8 is about build quality. Also to note is that the 1.4 has USM which makes it faster to focus and easier to manual focus as well. I would definitely still recommend the 1.4USM if the only knock against the 1.8 was focus speed. Heck, since you work at the store, use the return policy to your advantage. Try each of them and keep the one you like best and that works for your focal range.

Taken with 50 f1.8
It took a while to get her to sit still and not dive into the camera. So I would agree with a stand off lens
But it would depend on the pet and the ability of the dog to do what it's told

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

On a 20D, I'd definitely go for the 50mm f1.4. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the focus speed or the low light capability. If you want to stand back futher, the 85mm f1.8 is, as you've already noticed, a great lens. Besides, if you're doing pet portraits, I presume there will be some degree of control over the animals (position and lighting), making a zoom unnecessary.

Mark