Firstly, Happy New Year everybody! LOL - its day one of 2007 and I am busy focusing on what I am going to be doing this year

I am planning on getting the Canon 400D (XTi) and have been researching all about lenses and just getting more an more confused.

Before Christmas I stopped in at a pretty well respected camera shop and was told that the 400D which comes with a twin lens kit (18-55mm plus a 75-300mm Lens) would be suitable for my needs (pet portraits, mostly dogs, generally outdoors with a preference for close-ups and eventually dogs sports as well).

After researching it a bit, there seems to be people who are negative towards the lense kits, but the more I research the more I find other people who say they are great to start with and not to get additional lenses until you work out what you actually need according to what you shoot.

I've read through many of the posts here and see that there is quite a variety of lenses being used (and I am sure in time that I will add compulsively to my lense collection;) but it makes it all just a bit too confusing!

So the logical thing seems to be - ask the pet photography experts:) What would you consider the essential lenses to start with for pet photography? And then what would be the next essential ones to add to my collection?

I am quite happy to go for third party lenses rather than Canon ones if they are equivelent/better/lower prices...I don't want to buy too cheap if I will regret it, but I don't have unlimited funds either (if I did the question would be redundant!).

So advice and recommendations would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers

Michelle

Michelle,

EVERYONE goes through the lens confusion at all stages of photography. There are several equipment basics we all learn as we evolve in photography.

1. Cameras are like cars - they depreciate as soon as you buy them or when the next model comes out.

2. Good lenses cost more for good reason. They usually have better speed, build, contrast, bokeh, color, sharpness, etc

3. Good lenses do not depreciate much if you take care of them.

4. Lens choices are highly subjective.

5. Sometimes the lenses you get with a kit are the best buy you'll find.

So what it gets down to is research on your part

One good place I always recommend for lens research is http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews. Users leave their ratings along with the pros and cons. There are some real gems out there that take great pictures without the high price of a "pro" lens. Canon makes some of the best lenses but there are also many garbage lenses with the Canon logo on them.

Third party lenses are a great option. Once again you have to research. If you have a camera shop nearby that will rent a lens to you for a weekend of shooting that would be great. A friend my have a lens for you to evelauate. I have been known to let a friend or two use my lenses for such a purpose.

Have Fun!

Jeff

zingpix.com

I agree with Jeff, the Fred Miranda reviews really helped me with my choices.

It's hard to say which lenses would be best, depending on what you want to do. You will never have all the lenses you want I"m finding LOL!

For indoor and really close up shots I use the Tamron 28-75 2.8. It is a lot cheaper than the canon equivalent and the quality is almost the same, it is a great lens. (although now I'm spoiled with the 300 2.8 quality so am wanting something even better than the Tamron! You get spoiled fast). I love a very shallow DOF so I go for the fastest lens I can get (I am thinking of a 1.8 or 1.4 now).

For some indoor and most outdoor shots I use the canon 70-200 2.8. It's a great lens, very sharp, and still handholdable. But getting spendy.

For longer shots I use the 300 2.8, which also does really well with the 1.4 TC (some lenses lose too much quality but this is one of the lenses that doesn't).

I use my 200 1.8 for indoor shots at horse shows and dog shows. I don't use a flash so need the 1.8 (which sometimes even isn't quite enough in really dark arenas but normally it does well). I love that lens. It's big and heavy like the 300 but the quality is the best in those 2 lenses. Both of them are quite expensive though.

For starters I would highly recommend the tamron. You can sometimes find them on Fred Miranda's buy and sell forum too. I'm sure there are other good third party lenses out there too. I started with my kit lenses, which did well enough for a while but you will start wanting more!I believe I had both of those lenses in your kit in the beginning. I easily sold both the kit lenses on eBay and I also had a 100-400 lens for a while which was a nice reach but lacked the quality of the other lenses I have (plus was not as fast) so I sold it too. I listed it on Fred Miranda and got my first offer via email within 10 seconds, literally!! I got 7 more offers within 5 minutes so it's not hard to sell these lenses!

Thanks Jeff and Dee Dee, the info has certainly given me a place to start, LOL it would be so much easier if money was not a consideration, but I figure if I have some models to research first to see if they are in my price range I can then pick the ones that I can afford and choose from that list. LOL I started off the other way - finding the highly rated lenses to find that they were about 6 times what I can pay!

Michelle

Michelle,

If you are not stuck on zooms these are gems in the Canon line that are not too expensive:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - about $75 US
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM - about $300 US

They may make a nicer portrait lens than any of the kit lenses you mentioned.

As for a zoom I have this SIGMA:
Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF - about $450 US

Right after I bought it I sent it back to the Sigma factory for calibration. It came back to me acceptably sharp. Good contrast and a great alternative to the pricey Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM costing 3 times as much.

If you are shooting portraits you will want to have the ability to shoot in lower light situations so a lens with an f2.8 is great and also for controlling depth of field with a larger f-stop for selective focus.

Have Fun!
Jeff

zingpix.com

I am going to agree with both of these lenses - both are phenominal and very affordable. We recently added a 50 f1.4 to our arsenal - a lens I absolutely adore.

When we do portrait settings, I generally shoot with two cameras. One has my 16-35 and one has the 50 on it. The 28-70L is also a phenominal lens. I understand that Tamron produces a great 28-75 for 1/3 of the money as well.

James

Fred Miranda seems to be my first port of call when I am researching a lens.

My little 'gem' of a walk-around lens is the Tamron 28-75 (Tamron SP AF 28-75/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical(IF) Macro lens), as a couple others have mentioned. I LOVE this lens and use it alot for pet/dog portraits and macro stuff.

This butterfly is the first shot I took with the Tamron:



and the puppy I took just a couple days ago:



Hope the pictures post ok as I am not used to embedding images.

Michelle

Here are a couple more I have taken with the Tamron 28-75





I have used this lens for alot of my dog/animal portraits, flowers, nature and still life. When I need more reach (shows/events) I tend to use my wonderful Sigma 70-200mm/2.8
and for wildlife/birds 400mm alot (or 300mm with teleconverter)

Thanks for posting those shots chezzy, they are beautiful and absolutely the sort of shots that I like taking, so I think the tamron 28-75 is a definite add to the list:)

I have actually started looking at secondhand equipment in the hopes that I might find something in between now and when I was planning on purchasing new. (Dee Dee I would look at Fredmiranda, but i am in Australia and not keen on buying secondhand privately unless I can actually try the equipment).

Michelle