What is the best lens for...?

Sorry, couldn't resist
Sometimes I see interesting questions here.
1. What is the best lens to photograph kids? I think depends what age and gender...ideally folks need to specify all of these as it will narrow down the choice age, gender, personality...
2. What is the best lens to photograph a cat? For sure it is different than the one to photograph dogs...and monkey. I just can't image what to do when you go to a zoo
3. What is the best lens for italy? Well...too general Are we talking Monza, Rome or Florence perhaps? One can only hope it is not a tour around Europe....every city needs a different lens...
4. What is the best lens to photograph a man sitting on a chair and reading a newspaper? Can we be a bit more specific, are we talking the tribune or wsj?

I suggest that folks asking these questions should help thise answering by providing a very granular idea stating precisely what they want and do not want to photograph.

I also have idea for Canon. They should start adding all the info as part of the lens specifications: good for small dogs and japanese monkeys, can also work with a sleeping cat, etc

Heya,

1. Depends on location and desired framing. I prefer wider angle here, because they move move move.
2. They tend to chill. So any lens will work. Depends on how much distance you want.
3. I would take ultra wide angle (architecture) and anything under 85mm. Ideally 14~50mm.
4. Depends on distance from subject, and if you want hyper focus, or blur. 85~135mm.

Very best,

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16548939
Sorry, couldn't resist
Sometimes I see interesting questions here.
1. What is the best lens to photograph kids? I think depends what age and gender...ideally folks need to specify all of these as it will narrow down the choice age, gender, personality...
2. What is the best lens to photograph a cat? For sure it is different than the one to photograph dogs...and monkey. I just can't image what to do when you go to a zoo
3. What is the best lens for italy? Well...too general Are we talking Monza, Rome or Florence perhaps? One can only hope it is not a tour around Europe....every city needs a different lens...
4. What is the best lens to photograph a man sitting on a chair and reading a newspare? Can we be a bit more specific, are we talking the tribute or wsj?

I suggest that folks asking these questions should help thise answering by providing a very granular idea stating precisely what they want and do not want to photograph.

I also have idea for Canon. They should start adding all the info as part of the lens specifications: good for small dogs and japanese monkeys, can also work with a sleeping cat, etc

Understood.

In all seriousness, lens selection can be simplified to a two-step process, but the first step requires that the photographer know exactly what they are going to do with the camera.

That first step is to know the sort of framing you want to achieve and distances you'll face.

The second step is to know the amount of money you want to spend.

Those steps quickly let any photographer limit the potential choices.

Example: let say you want to take full-body figure shots from a typical distance of 10-20 feet. That sort of potential framing and distance implies a focal length of 18-60mm.

One way to shop is to head to the B&H web site, whch allows a shopper to search for lenses on focal lengths. Then select a suitable focal length range and see what's available for Canon EF mount lenses, and then choose something in the price range you want.

Basing your decision on price, you might choose a Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS lens if you want a low priced lens around US $200. If you have an extremely limited budget, you'll need to settle for one of the older Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses which can be found for much less. Increasing your budget brings the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 lens into play at US $1,200, or even the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 lens at US $2,200.

Now your budget may not allow you to purchase the best and brightest, but you'll be able to make a decision based on what you can spend.

Now, making a decision based on these factors means that a photographer must be intimately familiar with the relationship of focal length and field of view. The photographer must also be absolutely certain of the kind of framing they want for the pictures they wish to achieve.

Unfortunately, not every photographer has that degree of command over their equipment and work.

But when you understand how these factors combine, lens choice is simple. The pricing factor even comes into play for secondary decisions such as low-light capacity. Since (with the notable exception of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens) prices increase rapidly with increasing maximum aperture the price decision also chooses lens speed - bringing to mind the old racing axiom, "speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?" And since some prime lenses are less expensive than zooms in a focal length range, that factor is also included.

DC Fan wrote in post #16549179
Understood.

In all seriousness, lens selection can be simplified to a two-step process, but the first step requires that the photographer know exactly what they are going to do with the camera.

That first step is to know the sort of framing you want to achieve and distances you'll face.

The second step is to know the amount of money you want to spend.

Those steps quickly let any photographer limit the potential choices.

Example: let say you want to take full-body figure shots from a typical distance of 10-20 feet. That sort of potential framing and distance implies a focal length of 18-60mm.

One way to shop is to head to the B&H web site, whch allows a shopper to search for lenses on focal lengths. Then select a suitable focal length range and see what's available for Canon EF mount lenses, and then choose something in the price range you want.

Basing your decision on price, you might choose a Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS lens if you want a low priced lens around US $200. If you have an extremely limited budget, you'll need to settle for one of the older Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 lenses which can be found for much less. Increasing your budget brings the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 lens into play at US $1,200, or even the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 lens at US $2,200.

Now your budget may not allow you to purchase the best and brightest, but you'll be able to make a decision based on what you can spend.

Now, making a decision based on these factors means that a photographer must be intimately familiar with the relationship of focal length and field of view. The photographer must also be absolutely certain of the kind of framing they want for the pictures they wish to achieve.

Unfortunately, not every photographer has that degree of command over their equipment and work.

But when you understand how these factors combine, lens choice is simple. The pricing factor even comes into play for secondary decisions such as low-light capacity. Since (with the notable exception of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens) prices increase rapidly with increasing maximum aperture the price decision also chooses lens speed - bringing to mind the old racing axiom, "speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?" And since some prime lenses are less expensive than zooms in a focal length range, that factor is also included.

I'm on the lines of where you're going. I think getting an understanding of lenses in general and things like focal lengths, aperture, auto-focus abilities, etc will provide much more than just asking general question. At a minimum, it' ll help you understand what people are talking about in the response.

I still canon should provide info that the lens is for Florence, but will not work in Madrid. Also that the lens is for cats and monkeys, but will not work for dogs and horses, maybe ponys only. This will eliminate the confusion. Imagine how easy it would be

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16549226
I still canon should provide info that the lens is for Florence, but will not work in Madrid. Also that the lens is for cats and monkeys, but will not work for dogs and horses, maybe ponys only. This will eliminate the confusion. Imagine how easy it would be

Yes but then it'd be, "I've heard it works well for a Balinese, what about an American Shorthair?" or "I plan on being at <insert address>, will it work good there?" Hahaha. No matter the info provided, the questions will always remain.

Just wondering....say I need to photograph chihuahua on the streets of Venice....will the same lens work for a chihuahua shot in Berlin? I want to travel light...this is why I have chihuahua in my backpack, so I do not want to take too many lenses with me.

I completely agree with your post, Light Pilgrim.

The "best lens" for anything is constantly changing.

I specialize in photographing deer. When I see a buck in a particular spot, with his head turned slightly to the right, the "best lens" for capturing that moment might be a 500mm f4 IS. If he buck turns his head to the left, I would probably want to compose the shot differently, so now the "best lens" for the situation could be a 400mm f5.6.

Now, suppose that the deer takes a few steps up the hill. Ok, with him going up the hill like that, the best image would be a skyline silhouette. Better include those shapely evergreen trees on the horizon if I'm shooting a silhouette, so now the best lens for photographing that deer is either a 200-400 f4 or a 100-400mm f5.6, depending on exactly how much of the surrounding habitat you want to include in the shot.

Uh-oh! The buck now walks toward me, presenting an opportunity for head-on frame-filling portrait images at close range - the best lens for that deer now would be the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS. What? He turned broadside? Well, then, I think I suddenly need a 24-105 in order to compose the shot correctly.

One deer. One place. Over the course of 5 minutes, the "best lens" can change every few seconds.

The people asking these "best lens" questions really don't seem to get it, in my opinion. I mean, they don't seem to have a real grasp on composition and all of the different types of images that present themselves throughout the course of any photographic opportunity. If they did understand these things, they would not need to ask anyone what the best lens is. And if they don't understand these things, then there is really no lens in the world that will enable them to make the very most of the opportunities they are shooting, because they won't know exactly how to compose the images anyway.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16549749
I completely agree with your post, Light Pilgrim.

The "best lens" for anything is constantly changing.

I specialize in photographing deer. When I see a buck in a particular spot, with his head turned slightly to the right, the "best lens" for capturing that moment might be a 500mm f4 IS. If he buck turns his head to the left, I would probably want to compose the shot differently, so now the "best lens" for the situation could be a 400mm f5.6.

Now, suppose that the deer takes a few steps up the hill. Ok, with him going up the hill like that, the best image would be a skyline silhouette. Better include those shapely evergreen trees on the horizon if I'm shooting a silhouette, so now the best lens for photographing that deer is either a 200-400 f4 or a 100-400mm f5.6, depending on exactly how much of the surrounding habitat you want to include in the shot.

Uh-oh! The buck now walks toward me, presenting an opportunity for head-on frame-filling portrait images at close range - the best lens for that deer now would be the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS. What? He turned broadside? Well, then, I think I suddenly need a 24-105 in order to compose the shot correctly.

One deer. One place. Over the course of 5 minutes, the "best lens" can change every few seconds.

The people asking these "best lens" questions really don't seem to get it, in my opinion. I mean, they don't seem to have a real grasp on composition and all of the different types of images that present themselves throughout the course of any photographic opportunity. If they did understand these things, they would not need to ask anyone what the best lens is. And if they don't understand these things, then there is really no lens in the world that will enable them to make the very most of the opportunities they are shooting, because they won't know exactly how to compose the images anyway.

Exceptionally agreed. When I earlier noted that a photographer must also be absolutely certain of the kind of framing they want for the pictures they wish to achieve, that also implicitly acknowledged that most people don't know how to achieve that.

Sometimes experience may be taken for granted.

The choice for me is simple.

Person, object isolation, 85mm

Scenery ,indoors,lowlight, 28mm

Finches at 5pm 100-400mm

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16548939
2. What is the best lens to photograph a cat? For sure it is different than the one to photograph dogs...and monkey. I just can't image what to do when you go to a zoo

For most, the Daguerreotype process should suffice.

So what is the best lens to photograph chihuahua?

if taking food pictures at IHOP, then obviously the 40mm pancake lens is best.

shaftmaster wrote in post #16550500
if taking food pictures at IHOP, then obviously the 40mm pancake lens is best.

Clever.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16550450
So what is the best lens to photograph chihuahua?

In 'Europe' or the 'US of A'?