Going to the Zoo.

[crazyengineer1]

Just your typical city zoo, I have a canon 6d w/ 24-105.. Should I get a 70-200? Don't really care about taking pics of the animals, but want to take pics of the kids, + on rides etc..

 

[sixone]

As long as you're within a few feet of your subject, you won't need the long lens.

 

[randomrogue]

Google portrait focal lengths. What you want will depend on whether you're doing face only, shoulders and up, multiple people, etc but personally I find that 85mm on a full frame lens yields the most attractive pictures. Something around that focal length. This is for a face/chest shot. You can get good shots though with anywhere from 35mm and up though as long as you understand how it affects the portrait.

I don't think you need a new lens. I think you need to just figure out how much of a person you can get in an attractive portrait and which focal length to use.

 

[crazyengineer1]

I am just worried when they are on the rides that my 105 won't be able to reach them.

 

[dagamer34]

I am just worried when they are on the rides that my 105 won't be able to reach them.

Are these people you know? Unfortunately, I learned the hard way, the best photos will always come when you are closer to your subject, regardless of whether you have a zoom or not. This means breaking some boundaries. Get comfortable and unlock the potential of the lens you already have!

 

[randomrogue]

Rides at a zoo? What exactly are we talking about? Merry Go Round? Superman the Ride? Get closer. Then when you've maxed out both the zoom and the cropping ability of your camera look at getting a bigger lens.

 

[Silenus]

I've shot multiple times at the Bronx Zoo in NYC. In my case I was using a Nikon D40 and found the 70-200 f/2.8 to be a perfect zoo lens. Bear in mind that unlike your full frame sensor, mine was an APS-C crop sensor...AND...I was taking pics more of animals. So even with the crop sensor I found the focal length range excellent...not to mention having f/2.8 is very useful. On your full frame I'd say a 70-200 (f/4 or f/2.8) would be great, but perhaps not as usefull if you are aiming more at people pics and other stuff. If your not shooting animals primarily I'd say your 24-105 is probably a perfect walk lens.

 

[Paladin3]

Personally, I wouldn't want to go to a zoo with the family and have just one lens. The wide zoom and tele zoom make a great duo. Buy a belt pouch that fits either one and take both, one on the camera and one in the pouch.

Unless you can deal with the crappy image quality of one of the 28-200 supper zooms, two lenses is ideal for being prepared. If the weight of an added lens is going to be too much, I'd stick with your 24-105 and focus more on your family. You can still shoot the larger animals and the ones you can get close to.

Pictures of the tigers trying to eat your kid through the glass are always good, and that doesn't take a long lens at all.

 

[aayush]

Great...just go for it

 

[SecurityTheatre]

Personally, I wouldn't want to go to a zoo with the family and have just one lens.

Personally, I woudln't want to go to the zoo with multiple kids and have to worry about multiple lenses.



Just a thought....

I would stick with the 105. Taking pictures of kids on the very top of ride isn't anything special, just wait until they're closer to you.