Newborn Portrait Lens

My girl is almost 7 months old and barely recognizes me without a black square in front of my face. I think I have shot 99.9% of the 99000 photos of her with my 50D and a 50mm 1.4. You could do the same with the 1.8.

A good investment, imho, would be a lightstand, shootthrough umbrella, and a cheap trigger set. Then you won't be stuck trying to catch window light, AND if you do have good window light, you can use your flash and umbrella setup for a little extra fill.

I'm using the 28 a lot but also the 100, so I don't think there's a magic number in the middle. Remember, it's OK to shoot a bit wide and then crop. If you have a 35 at your disposal, and the Nifty (and a 430), I think you're in pretty good shape.

I bought the 28 because I thought 35 might be a bit too tight for our house. If 35 works for you, great.

CrackedLens wrote in post #14961884
My girl is almost 7 months old and barely recognizes me without a black square in front of my face. I think I have shot 99.9% of the 99000 photos of her with my 50D and a 50mm 1.4. You could do the same with the 1.8.

If 7 months and nearly 100 thousand is accurate and not off by a factor of 10, then I would suggest just doing constant video so you don't miss any thing.

I think I will stick with my current set up and work on the lighting set up

However I'm liking the idea of a macro lens. Is the 60 mm a descent lens on a crop??

The 60/2.8 is probably the sharpest lens you can mount on a crop camera.

russ925 wrote in post #14962276
However I'm liking the idea of a macro lens. Is the 60 mm a descent lens on a crop??

It is, but it offers no benefits over the 50mm f1.8 for portraiture. 50mm f1.8 is also razor sharp at f2.8, even if the macro is a little sharper it's not going to make a difference. You don't need to get macro close to babies, either. Your kit lens does 1:3 Macro which is small enough to fill the frame with something just under 3" long.

SkipD wrote in post #14959716
You have to remember that lighting is the most critical component of good portraiture.

Couldn't agree more.

I never had any problem using 85mm on FF for newborn portraits in a hospital room - which is similar to your 1.8 on a 1.6 crop camera.
My suggestion would be to stick with the 50mm 1.8, and spend the money on a studio flash. If you spent $1000 on a new lens, it will make a small difference. You could pay half the price and get a new flash which would transform your photos.

tkbslc wrote in post #14962387
It is, but it offers no benefits over the 50mm f1.8 for portraiture. 50mm f1.8 is also razor sharp at f2.8, even if the macro is a little sharper it's not going to make a difference. You don't need to get macro close to babies, either. Your kit lens does 1:3 Macro which is small enough to fill the frame with something just under 3" long.

It does offer consistent focus accuracy which I don't get with my 50/1.8 and although the 60/2.8 isn't a bokeh gem, it's still much better than the 50/1.8 with it's pentagon shaped OOF highlites.