Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

carlgo

macrumors 68000
Dec 29, 2006
1,806
17
Monterey CA
Chasing kids around requires a longer lens. They don't like the 50mms being shoved up their noses. Studio settings different, but you still have to stay back a little.

Why not get a good mid-zoom that utilizes vibration control? Some would say they aren't as sharp, others say you can't tell the difference.

I do know that filling the frame is the cheapest way to maximise pixels and a zoom does that.

In a studio you need all sorts of complex lighting stuff, but outside with your stabilized lens you won't need any flash, or maybe just a little fill. Nothing too hard and modern cameras deal with that very well, automatically.
 

Cave Man

macrumors 604
Chasing kids around requires a longer lens. They don't like the 50mms being shoved up their noses. Studio settings different, but you still have to stay back a little.

A 50mm lens on the OP's camera is equivalent to an 80mm on a full-frame camera. There's no "up their noses" with it.

Why not get a good mid-zoom that utilizes vibration control? Some would say they aren't as sharp, others say you can't tell the difference.

But there's no doubt that IS/OS/VC has nothing to do with freezing moving objects.

In a studio you need all sorts of complex lighting stuff, but outside with your stabilized lens you won't need any flash, or maybe just a little fill.

For kid portraiture, you must have stopping action and USM/HSM focusing - they move constantly. Image stabilizing lenses have no advantage over non-stabilized lenses in this regard. You must have (1) a fast shutter speed (i.e., lots of ambient light, large aperture, or higher ISO) or (2) flash lighting. There's no other way around it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.