What is the best Lens for Advertising "product" Photography

If you have money to buy another lens I suggest the Canon 100mm macro non-L. It's $550 right now on B&H Photo. I have one and it's very sharp. If you want the best sharpness without spending a couple thousand dollars, get a prime lens (non-zoom).

Unfortunately, the question you are asking is a bit like "which low cost consumer grade lens will give me top quality, professional, results" and of course it doesn't really work that way. The reason those other lenses cost so much is because they are better, and aimed at the professional / serious amateur market.

Commercial product advertising work is largely done on medium format cameras (shooting at up to 200 megapixels and costing up to £30,000) with very high quality lenses, so don't expect to match the quality with low end gear.

However, as mentioned above a good prime can still deliver very good results at reasonable cost.

One thing nobody has mentioned yet, how much sharpening are you adding at the editing stage? The 7D has a reputation for soft images straight out of the camera and needs a little more sharpening than most cameras. If you aren't sharpening sufficiently, that combined with using a prime instead of a superzoom, which are not the most efficient of designs due to the compromises needed to get such a wide range of focal lengths, should improve your shots significantly.

Otherwise, just get your technique right, suitable apertures, tripod, timer or remote release, mirror lock up etc. as mentioned above.

Geejay wrote in post #14905886
How do you set up?
What focal length, f-stop, distance to subject, distance to background, focus point(s), shooting mode, etc..

Even though a 5D/1DS series with some nice glass (tilt and shift lens is handy in this situation but is expensive) would I guess be a more optimal gear choice for product shots, the 7D with your current lens or those suggeted above should be more than good enough to deliver sharp images.

Have you studied this area of photography? I'm thinking about lighting and DOF mainly. These are pretty high on the list of things to understand and control for product shots. Perspective and the effects of focal length also figure..

i want to cry not
well if you are asking about the attached picture how i tok it.. i really forget how! but i can see the info that may help.. i was asking about the lenses but i figured that i really need to understand much more than the lenses... well im graphic designer i have some knowledge but not in cameras

Dabrix wrote in post #14905882
Like: CP, GND, L-version, IQ, LR.... <-- all this lol

CP=circular polarizer, good for cutting reflections- you don't need one
GND=graduated neutral density filters, good for landscapes where the sky is bright, and the foreground is dark- you don't need one
L-version=L lenses are the professional series of lenses from canon- still don't need one for sharp product shots
IQ=image quality, how good an image a lens can deliver
LR=lightroom...program used by many here...like photoshop

Dabrix wrote in post #14905917
i want to cry not
well if you are asking about the attached picture how i tok it.. i really forget how! but i can see the info that may help.. i was asking about the lenses but i figured that i really need to understand much more than the lenses... well im graphic designer i have some knowledge but not in cameras

if you have the original shot(resized works), and not saved for web...we can find all the settings...

sandpiper wrote in post #14905914
Unfortunately, the question you are asking is a bit like "which low cost consumer grade lens will give me top quality, professional, results" and of course it doesn't really work that way. The reason those other lenses cost so much is because they are better, and aimed at the professional / serious amateur market.

Commercial product advertising work is largely done on medium format cameras (shooting at up to 200 megapixels and costing up to £30,000) with very high quality lenses, so don't expect to match the quality with low end gear.

However, as mentioned above a good prime can still deliver very good results at reasonable cost.

One thing nobody has mentioned yet, how much sharpening are you adding at the editing stage? The 7D has a reputation for soft images straight out of the camera and needs a little more sharpening than most cameras. If you aren't sharpening sufficiently, that combined with using a prime instead of a superzoom, which are not the most efficient of designs due to the compromises needed to get such a wide range of focal lengths, should improve your shots significantly.

Otherwise, just get your technique right, suitable apertures, tripod, timer or remote release, mirror lock up etc. as mentioned above.

That's true.. i use this photography as added value to my customers, and i understand high quality pictures = expensive lenses!
but im a graphic designer, i really do retouching on pictures and i get them like what i want but why not get them at least sharp enough before editing in photoshop.

Were you leaving the IS (image stabilization) on when it's on the tripod?

Dabrix wrote in post #14905944
i really do retouching on pictures and i get them like what i want but why not get them at least sharp enough before editing in photoshop.

The 7D has a strong anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor, which does soften the image a bit, you need to sharpen them to counteract that at least.

I know you haven't got "image editing OK" turned on, but I hope you don't mind that I did a quick sharpen on the label and inset it against the original. If you do mind, just say so and I will take it down.

Bear in mind this was a 5 second "down and dirty" sharpen, it could probably be improved with a little more care. It isn't going to come out razor sharp, but I don't think you are as far out of the ball park as you think you are.

DreDaze wrote in post #14905940
CP=circular polarizer, good for cutting reflections- you don't need one
GND=graduated neutral density filters, good for landscapes where the sky is bright, and the foreground is dark- you don't need one
L-version=L lenses are the professional series of lenses from canon- still don't need one for sharp product shots
IQ=image quality, how good an image a lens can deliver
LR=lightroom...program used by many here...like photoshop

if you have the original shot(resized works), and not saved for web...we can find all the settings...

Ok, i didn't found the same picture above! but i have uploaded new one not resized it's better than the first one but you can see what's wrong with it. here is the link:
http://dabrix.com/IMG_​1068.JPG

sandpiper wrote in post #14905964
The 7D has a strong anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor, which does soften the image a bit, you need to sharpen them to counteract that at least.

I know you haven't got "image editing OK" turned on, but I hope you don't mind that I did a quick sharpen on the label and inset it against the original. If you do mind, just say so and I will take it down.

Bear in mind this was a 5 second "down and dirty" sharpen, it could probably be improved with a little more care. It isn't going to come out razor sharp, but I don't think you are as far out of the ball park as you think you are.

this picture before any retouching! ofcourse i will not do shrpning and put it here and tell you guys why i don't get sharp images!

ct1co2 wrote in post #14905955
Were you leaving the IS (image stabilization) on when it's on the tripod?

yes it was ON when i shoot that picture!

so your shot was at 32mm, f5.6 1/100 ISO 800...

i'd stop down the lens to f8/f11 lower the ISO, and since you're on a tripod you'll have a slow shutter speed...but use the timer function so you pressing the shutter doesn't cause any blur

of course if you're happy with that focal length something like a sigma 30mm f1.4 would give you a sharp shot at f5.6

honestly though, i'd probably just boost the in camera sharpening...stop it down a bit, and be happy...for a product shot i don't think you need 100% crops to be super super sharp...if you want to get closer details take a closer shot

DreDaze wrote in post #14905981
so your shot was at 32mm, f5.6 1/100 ISO 800...

i'd stop down the lens to f8/f11 lower the ISO, and since you're on a tripod you'll have a slow shutter speed...but use the timer function so you pressing the shutter doesn't cause any blur

of course if you're happy with that focal length something like a sigma 30mm f1.4 would give you a sharp shot at f5.6

honestly though, i'd probably just boost the in camera sharpening...stop it down a bit, and be happy...for a product shot i don't think you need 100% crops to be super super sharp...if you want to get closer details take a closer shot

Thanks alot that's really helpful im reading about the sigma lens sounds good!

Dabrix wrote in post #14905774
Hi,
I use Canon 7D with the regular lens kit "18-135mm" when i use it for product photography i always get blurred pictures! i mean not SHARP!! (Please check the attached)

what is the best lens to use and please don't mention the thousand dollars lenses

The question should be more "what is the best camera to use?" For product photography, a medium format camera has been the usual device for professionals. For decades, the Hasselblad 500 series was the camera that would most often be found at work in studios and in the field for fashion and product work. The Hasselblad was preferred because the 35mm format was considered to not capture enough detail to be usable in in print for the large magazine pages and detailed printing thst was common for the first half of the 20th century. Even now, many product photographers who make a living that way use a Hasselblad, except that they've moved their lenses to the Hasselblad H-series digital cameras.

Not only do Hasselblad lenses cost in the thousands of dollars, the Hasselblad H-series digital cameras are priced in the tens of thousands. For many of the busiest professionals, the prices of the digital medium format cameras are considered a bargain, because they no longer need to spend money on film and processing.

Frankly, using a DSLR that is a descendant of the old 35mm SLR's can be considered the technical equivalent of bringing a knife to a gunfight for product photography, for reasons that have been noted in this thread.

DC Fan wrote in post #14906197
The question should be more "what is the best camera to use?" For product photography, a medium format camera has been the usual device for professionals. For decades, the Hasselblad 500 series was the camera that would most often be found at work in studios and in the field for fashion and product work. The Hasselblad was preferred because the 35mm format was considered to not capture enough detail to be usable in in print for the large magazine pages and detailed printing thst was common for the first half of the 20th century. Even now, many product photographers who make a living that way use a Hasselblad, except that they've moved their lenses to the Hasselblad H-series digital cameras.


Not only do Hasselblad lenses cost in the thousands of dollars, the Hasselblad H-series digital cameras are priced in the tens of thousands. For many of the busiest professionals, the prices of the digital medium format cameras are considered a bargain, because they no longer need to spend money on film and processing.

Frankly, using a DSLR that is a descendant of the old 35mm SLR's can be considered the technical equivalent of bringing a knife to a gunfight for product photography, for reasons that have been noted in this thread.

Pentax 645D: $10k and it works with all the Pentax MF lenses. A bargain.

TSchrief wrote in post #14906395
Pentax 645D: $10k and it works with all the Pentax MF lenses. A bargain.

Apologies to supporters of Pentax, Bronica, Mamiya/PhaseOne and Rolleiflex medium format cameras for the omissions.