Just curious!

I'm not sure if it's okay to post this here or not, but I felt like it would be the best place to ask a question concerning kids.

What lens do you use most when taking pictures of children and/or your family?

The only lens I have right now that works is a 50mm f/ 1.8 (I have a Canon Rebel T3i for a body) I find myself really frustrated with it because I can never get far enough away when we're inside to get more than a faceshot, and even sometimes outside I have this problem, I just have to back up SO far sometimes. I'd like to get a new lens in the upcoming year, but I have no idea where to start and I really just want ONE good lens that is less than $1000.

Pretty much the only thing I take pictures of is my kids, who are all boys (6 years, 20 months and 3 months). So I'm just curious what lens everyone uses when taking picture of their kids, and would you recommend it?

Hi I remember being in the same boat a few years ago. I didn't like 50mm lens on a crop body for indoor stuff because I was backing up way too much. My suggestion would be to get a Sigma 30 1.4 which is about 50mm on a crop. For outdoor stuff I would get a Canon 85 1.8, to compliment the Sigma 30 which would be a nice focal length for outdoors as well.
I would also suggest getting a external flash like a 430 ex ii and bounce flash off walls/ceiling etc.
All this you can easily get for about $7-800 used here on POTN.
I know you said "1" lens but I feel a two punch low light prime combo with flash will work better IMHO.

Have fun with it

Adam

I'm on a tight budget so I bought a used Tamron 28-75 2.8 to combat this problem and to give myself a chance of full body shots in my home "studio".

There are lots of options but I think you would be best served going with a zoom lens.

Canon 17-55 f/2.8 is great. Tamron/Sigma also make an equivalent that is a bit cheaper and also highly rated if you find a sharp copy. All can be found under $1,000

Sigma 17-50mm

Canon 17-55mm

Tamron 17-50mm

I like the 70-200 range for candid shots of kids.
The Canon 70-200 f/4.0L USM is one of the best deals out there for a really excellent lens.

hairy_moth wrote in post #16398293
I like the 70-200 range for candid shots of kids.
The Canon 70-200 f/4.0L USM is one of the best deals out there for a really excellent lens.

Sure but not for complaint that OP has. 70-200mm would make their problems worse.

forouza1 wrote in post #16398298
Sure but not for complaint that OP has. 70-200mm would make their problems worse.

Good point, I read the first part of the sentence and breezed over the second: "I can never get far enough away"

Did you ever see the Saturday Night Live spoof of the "China Syndrome," I think it was called the "Pepsi Syndrome." Right before he died, the chief engineer said: "You can't put too much water in a nuclear reactor!" It was amusing watching the two underlings try to figure out what he meant!

Thanks for the opinions everyone!

Yeah, a 70-200 is probably a great zoom lens but it would definitely make my problem worse right now.

I am in the exact same situation as you right now! I have a kit lens, 50mm 1.8 and a t3i lol. I love the 1.8 as it produced incredible images such as this one: Shot with a t3i, 50mm 1.8 and this is straight out of the camera shot in Large. No editing and the image is amazing in my eyes for being a quick turn around a snap the shot with w/e settings where on lol

For you? I might suggest at Canon 17-40 f4L. $839 on their site. http://shop.usa.canon.​com …ct%20Listing%20​Ads-_-8940

On your body it would effectively be like a 30-70ish mm.

Or if you want a lot cheaper, the Canon 28-135 3.5/5.6 would also suit your needs. I picked up one a few years back used for $200. It's not fancy as it's one of Canon's kit lenses, but it gets the job done.

Both would give you the versatility to pull back the shot when space is limited. The 17-40 would have better bokeh, image quality and color but costs 4X more.

On my 5d2 I'm always glued to my Sigma 50 1.4 but I'm always hustling back and forth to frame my shot. But then again, I'm always shooting in open outdoors.

No ones ever suggested an L lens to me before, haha. Would it be worth spending the money to use it on a crop body? I've heard that L lenses don't work as well on crop bodys.

KareBear wrote in post #16415059
No ones ever suggested an L lens to me before, haha. Would it be worth spending the money to use it on a crop body? I've heard that L lenses don't work as well on crop bodys.

That's wrong!
I can tell you from first hand experience that the 70-200 is fantastic on a crop.

There are some things to consider however:
Spending a lot of money for a full-frame wide-angle, on a crop, is probably not worth the cost; the resulting shots won't be that wide; some of the EF-S lenses do better in that space. So, as far as that goes, I believe the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 is a better choice for a crop than the 17-40L. When I got my 7D, I was torn between the: 24-70 f/2.8L, 17-40 f/4L and the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 -- after reading the reviews, the 17-55 looked like the best choice. Cost or the "L" label were not the critical issues: the 17-55 is just as expensive as the 17-40 and, when you added in the cost of a hood and pouch -- both included with the 24-70 -- the 17-55 was nearly as much as the last generation 24-70. The test results from the reviews showed that the 17-55 was sharper than the other two, the auto focus was faster and it was f/2.8 (really helpful for indoor shooting). The 17-55 was also a better range for everyday shooting on a crop than the 24-70 (it mimics the field of view on a crop that the 24-70 provides on a FF).

Canon spends (and charges) a lot of money to get their L lenses sharp out to the corners of the frame, some of that expense is for naught when using a crop; this is especially true for wide angles. The expense of the 17-55 was in making it an f/2.8 lens, sharp to the crop corners.

But, back to the "L on a crop" question, as far as the quality of the resulting images, the speed and accuracy of the focus, the durability of the lens... it is all still good on a crop!

^ very valid points. I forgot about the 17-55. I might lean towards that for you.

I would almost say that they are better on a crop body over a full frame because you don't have to worry about those corners as much. Perhaps I'm wrong, but for work I shoot a few L lenses in video and shoot photos while there's down time and the image quality is crisp from edge to edge no matter what. Granted I'm using the 24-70 F4 L lens and it's a fantastic lens. It's not quite the F2.8 version but it's great on the crop body and is super sharp when I'm tac on. The only thing you have to consider is the crop part of this, you're getting less of a field of view. Just remember, these lenses are good on the crop body, and will still be good when you upgrade. They will be like a brand new lens when you go FF, so I'd go with an L and start saving for a 6D or a MkII

This thread was great for me. Almost all of the lenses mentioned, I personally own and love each one of them for the reasons mentioned. The Sigma 30 1.4 is a fantastic indoor portrait lens, but it still will not let you get full body shots indoors. I have the Canon 85 1.8 which I absolutely love for indoor sports and outdoor portraits.
I also have the 70-200 F4 non IS that to me is the best lens I have ever put on my camera. It is just so versatile across the entire range. I recently picked up the 17-40 F4 and it would be my pick for the OP based on his specific needs.
I also agree with others that you would also be greatly served by picking up an external flash. The on camera flash will work in a pinch, but you can do so much more with off camera flash.
Here would be my purchase plan with the $1000 mentioned.
Used 17-40 F4 - available here for around $600-650 usually
Yonguo YN565EX - $100 on Amazon or YN 568EX if you want HSS $180 on Amazon
2 Yongnuo 622C flash triggers - $85 Amazon
Or if you wanted to go prime:
Canon 85 1.8 - $359 on Amazon
Sigma 30 1.4 - Try to find used as new ones are $499 but really stellar lens
Yongnuo YN 565ex - $100 Amazon
Flash Sync Cord to get flash off camera - about $25 on Amazon depending on brand.