Toy dilemma

[SimonMac]

5D III

Very nice....... For Canon

[ThomasSoerensen]

What are you using the glass with?

[SimonMac in TOG mode]

5D III

[SimonMac]

What are you using the glass with?

[SimonMac in TOG mode]

[MicrosoftBob]

For big lenses if you're starting outthe sigma 150-500mm is affordable on a budget, and just about light enough to be able to lug around with a monopod all day

Or go for a 70-200 f2.8, and get teleconverter for when you need more reach, most people don't use beyond 200mm much unless they're birdwatchers (either kind)

[doodab]

I feel the "need" for some new glass for my camera now that the spring is approaching.
And I would like to hear your input on whether I should get the Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 or the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4 zoom for telephotos and the Zeiss 55mm 1.4 "Otus" for a wider lens.

It will mainly be for shooing the kids playing around and when walking in the forest and in the neighbourhood.

What do you guys think?

I wouldn't look at the Zeiss lenses for photographing kids, they are nicely made but the manual focus will be a PITA. The Canon 35/1.4 L would be a better bet.

The 400/2.8 and 200-400/4 zoom (or any other big telephoto for that matter) are big lenses that weigh close to 4kg each, so not really ideal for hand held use. Unless they are someone else's kids and you don't want to be arrested I'd say the 135/2 or 85/1.8 are far more suitable. OTOH if you just want to spunk thousands on a big telephoto then go for it. I'd hire one for a weekend before parting with that sort of cash though.

[ThomasSoerensen]

If you're into taking photos of kids, something more covert might be better.

this helps with that
http://www.lenscoat.com/lenscoat%C2%AE-canon-200400-p-1917.html

[d000hg]

If you're into taking photos of kids, something more covert might be better.

[ThomasSoerensen]

Also, what lenses do you already have?

I have the 16-35 2.8, the 24-70 2.8 the 70-200 2.8 plus a few primes that I use for more planned "serious" shooting - the 35mm sigma art, the 50 1.2, the 85 1.2 and the 100mm 2.8 macro.

[Ticktock]

Also, what lenses do you already have?
If you're looking at Canon then surely you already have an 18-55mm or very similar zoom? I use this more than any other, although I have a 50mm prime and a longer zoom (I think it's up to either 200 or 300mm). For the longer zoom I find it really does need a tripod and remote - I haven't taken a single non-blurry handheld shot with it at longer zoom, in any light, let alone going for shots of kids running about.

Personally, I have trouble getting used to prime lenses so would always go for a zoom at the moment, especially for pics of my dog running about, but then I'm a highly noobish amateur who hasn't had an SLR for long - YMMV.

[ThomasSoerensen]

I normally value quality over quantity.

The kids play every weekend, so there are plenty of opportunities to photograph them.
And I really really like my pictures to be sharp and free of unwanted movement related blurriness. That is why I doubt the f/4 will be fast enough for the fast moving kids. but it does have the handy zoom that the f/2.8 lacks.

[MicrosoftBob]

Presuming this isn't a troll

Kids move a lot, I'd get a travel lens that goes from wide angle to a reasonable zoom 18/20 to 200/300, as with kids capturing the moment is the most important thing

Leave the big lenses for sports and wildlife

[ThomasSoerensen]

I feel the "need" for some new glass for my camera now that the spring is approaching.
And I would like to hear your input on whether I should get the Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 or the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4 zoom for telephotos and the Zeiss 55mm 1.4 "Otus" for a wider lens.

It will mainly be for shooing the kids playing around and when walking in the forest and in the neighbourhood.

What do you guys think?