Lens for food photography? (using 5d)

[endorphin]

Can anyone please recommend me a good lens for food photography? I was thinking to buy 85mm f1.8, but i'm not sure whether it'll focus close enough
thanks..

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

Its a full frame, hence not restricted to the 1.6 or 1.3 crop of other bodies.

It actually depends on the layout and type of view you would like to project.

Using a 50mm macro will be a good start.

If taking a variety, a wide angle is better. If taking individual items then a tele would be better.

Perhaps you could just list down what kinda lens you have.

[midicity]

The canon 100mm f2.8 macro is always good. Especially for your 5D. Any shorter and you would have to be quite close to your food.

Not sure what other lenses you have, but can also use the 100mm for portraits.

[endorphin]

I was using 1.6 crop body before, and 50mm f1.8 was enough..
that's why I'm thinking to get 85mm f1.8
now i got 17-40 (too wide) and 70-200 (too tele) -_-

[Del_CtrlnoAlt]

Originally Posted by endorphin I was using 1.6 crop body before, and 50mm f1.8 was enough.. that's why I'm thinking to get 85mm f1.8 now i got 17-40 (too wide) and 70-200 (too tele) -_-

i think a 50 1st, then a 85, or 100.

[Denosha]

I don't think you need a macro lens for food photography as you typically won't need to shoot that close up. Anyway, a 35L on a 1.6x crop body seems just nice so i guess a 50mm on FF would be good too? If you're considering different focal lengths you can look at the magnification rather than the MFD as it will give you a better indication of how much you can fill in the frame given it's focal length and MFD.

[Dream Merchant]

It all depends on the layout.

50 macro on a FF is OK for food, especially if you want or need to include lots of BG. You might find it too restrictive for pax or detail shots though. Perspectives would also be different. And generally, you need to get in close to the set-up unless you're including the environment.

Sometimes, a 50 on a FF is just not ideal, or may even be downright dangerous as folks need to constantly move around the dish right up till the last moment before the shot is taken. If your camera and tripod is close to the table, you run the risk of tripping up everything. Also, consider that you'll need room to place stands, reflectors etc etc etc. I don't know - a 50 on a FF just sounds way too crampy to me.

A lot of commercial product and food work is done with some sort of short tele - 80 - 150mm range, and actually, a 90mm or 100mm macro may be one of the most useful food lenses you could ever own, besides a short-tele TnS lens. Why? Greater working distance, flatter perspectives and overall versatility, besides speed in actual use.

There will always be times when you'll need to get in just that slight bit closer and you might find a non-macro tele one of the most frustrating things ever. Unless you don't mind using extension tubes and the food won't suffer the wait.

[spartacus.ret]

TS-E 45mm.

[mtunlinn]

MFD for 85mm is too long. Almost 1 meter. It will restrict you. Better go for macro lens. Alternative to 50mm and 100mm may be Sigma 70mm?

[grantyale]

TS-E 45 or 90 maybe, depending on what exactly you'll be shooting.

[dragos]

i use the 100mm macro and the 17-40mm for my food shots.

[fireblaster_lyz]

Any nice, sharp, low aperture lens will do.
Depends on alot of factors (especially client needs.)

EDIT: It seems you are BUYING a lens just for food photography. Reconsider this option. If not, RENT it.

[xunjas]

i have used 24-105mm and 24-70mm for food. i prefer 24-70mm as it has shorter focus dist..