Lens for food photography

[KitchenGoddess]

I have a Nikon D60 but have only the 'standard' lens sold with the camera body and am looking to buy something more specific for food photography. I've been told a macro lens would be good but anymore tips or suggestions would be much appreciated.

[RichardtheSane]

Unless you plan on getting really close I don't see how a macro lens would be much use.

TBH I think your kit lens will do fine, but you may want to invest in a good quality flash or lighting setup. From what I have read and a couple of attempts good food photgraphy is all about good lighting and food presentation.

[Dave Stone]

A Macro lens would be fine. They are very sharp prime lenses and great for portraits too. The large apetures they have will give you good DOF effects as well.

[DizMatt]

it's over the top
unless you're taking pictures of berries and not plates of food
I would think a nice sharp 50mm prime would do the trick
it's about portrait lengths on a cropped sensor
tack sharp and lots of scope for DOF
most importantly I would look at lighting

[Tim Sainsbury]

Lighting is more important here I think, after messing around this morning splashing coffee all over the place, lighting was the thing I struggled with most. DOF is also very sweet if you want your pictures to look extra special I think.

[KitchenGoddess]

Thank you for your replies.

Excuse my ignorance but is DOF, depth of field?

[Tim Sainsbury]

It is!

[david1701]

lighting is where you wanna spend the cash not glass (though a 50mm prime is well worth funding)

[KitchenGoddess]

Ahh ok; I was under the impression that all I needed was a good source of natural light ... obviously there is so much more to this than I realised.

[DizMatt]

light needs to be pretty even
no shadows and few shiny highlights

search for food photography. someone posted some cracking food shots recently
some kind soul will probs link you if you're patient

[fabs]

Do a search for a user here called Glitch. There ain't much he don't know about food photography. :thumbs:

[TimSandhu]

I agree with the above. Glitch is the man you need to speak to about food photography. He's pretty damn good at this stuff and uses a fair bit of natural light if I'm not mistaken.

Controlled lighting is great for consistency but I still don't think anything beats natural lighting for food though - with a few reflectors to eliminate shadows.

[KitchenGoddess]

Thanks for your help :) I'll search for some of Glitch's posts.

[glitch]

Blimey, I didn't think anyone took much notice of my ramblings about food photography. I've got a lot to live up to after that rather nice introduction by fabs and Tim!

Looking through your blog, KG, it seems like you are taking this whole thing quite seriously so I'm going to assume that you want to take the photography equally as seriously. And for that you're going to need to make a hefty investment - but luckily more in time than money, although you could spend as freely as you wanted to.

The first thing you're going to want to do is look at lighting and the good news there is that the best lighting for good food photography is free! As Tim has already mentioned, natural light really is the best and we're rapidly approaching that time of year where you've got plenty of it to work with. All you really need is a suitable room (or selection of rooms), something to diffuse the light, a load of reflectors and about five pairs of hands to hold them all. Or you can just get creative with lighting stands, blu-tack, etc. But the look that works best for me relies on a single large light source (the windows) and light being bounced back into the subject from every angle.

If at all possible I like to shoot in my lounge and at this time of year that gives me a working window of between 10am and roughly 4pm. I'm fortunate enough that it's south-facing and has a massive set of French windows at the end which allows loads of light to spill in and bounce around the room so it's really practical all-year-round Unfortunately the walls aren't quite the right colour, being a light-ish yellow, but I've got creative with white foam-core in the vital areas rather than redecorating. I also employ a large (2m²) diffuser to cover the window and soften the light and sometimes double-up when it's a really bright day or use a single thinner diffuser when it's slightly overcast but still too bright.

General rule of thumb for me is if you can put a shiny white plate in the sunlight and you're getting harsh reflections and dark shadows then it's time to get the diffuser(s) out. I've got a couple of really shiny dinner plates that don't see much use for my work but serve well as test subjects - try and track down at least one on your travels as it's a great help. Want to know what the best thing is? The cheapest and nastiest glazes are generally the best for testing so there's no need to spend a fortune on expensive china.

In terms of bouncing light around, I'll use whatever I can get my hands on, but I tend to favour white foam-core card. You can pick it up from your local craft supply store at a reasonable price, but it does get 'better' the more you pay. I tend to work with sizes from A3 up to A0 and try to buy the best stuff I can find as I've noticed the thinner 'cheap' stuff tends to start yellowing a lot quicker - and you don't want to be bouncing yellow-ish light around! Either way, store your card somewhere dark and try to keep it as spotless as possible.

If you really can't shoot during the optimum conditions or your 'studio' doesn't allow for decent light, you'll need to fake it. I find the most effective approach to be of trying to recreate the large single light source using artificial light so for that you'll need one (or more) large light sources. For me that means lights with big softboxes (I use Speedlites with Lastolite's 60cm Ezybox Hotshoe) and the same selection of reflectors and diffusers to recreate that 'flood' of light you get from the optimum natural lighting conditions. It all sounds simple and to be fair it's quite a simple theory but the method takes a lot of experimenting with to get right.

The benefit of using a system like the Speedlite/Ezybox Hotshoe combo is that it's incredibly portable and easy to set up on location or in conditions where you wouldn't necessarily get a set of studio lights in or even to. The downside is that it's an expensive way of doing things as you'll probably have to throw in some form of remote triggering (not sure what the equivalent of the ST-E2 is for Nikon users) or run the risk of cabling it all together.

Once you've got the lighting sorted and you're confident you can recreate your 'look' in various locations you can then start to worry about the equipment you're shooting with. The first bit of kit I'd recommend would be a sturdy tripod that's easy to position and a suitable head (I like geared three-way heads for fine adjustments) for the sort of work you'll be doing. If you'll be doing a lot of work in a studio then you might consider a camera stand, but that would be far too heavy to transport around so a decent tripod and head would probably make for a good long-term investment.

With regards to the body you are shooting with, I have to admit to having zero knowledge of Nikon cameras although from looking at the specifications it seems fine to me, especially if your output is mostly web-based at present. In reality it will be the glass on the front as much as the subject matter in front of you that will determine just how good your shots are but when you upgrade I'd highly recommend a camera with Live View functionality.

Now, to the glass. And here's where the problems start. I shoot with a 5D and Canon's TS-E 90mm f/2.8 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Tilt-and-Shift_Lenses/TS_E_90mm_f28/index.asp) tilt/shift lens. For me it's the perfect combination and I'd recommend any food photographer do the same. You get an amazingly sharp lens, excellent background blur, great contrast, an extremely usable focal length and minimum focus distance and the amazing creative control that a tilt/shift lens gives you.

Unfortunately you are a Nikon user and while I'd like to recommend their 85mm f/2.8 PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1665/overview.html) I've found their 24mm PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1550/overview.html) a tricky lens to get on with and from what I've read the 85mm will be more of the same. It just doesn't seem to function in the same way as the Canon and I find that incredibly frustrating. It doesn't even fit properly on some bodies! And let's face it - if you've bought a D60 you're hardly likely to be spending somewhere in the region of £1,300 on a lens alone.

So If I was going to buy a brand-new lens for food photography, I'd be spending my pennies on Canon's 50mm f/1.2L (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f12L_USM/index.asp) or even the 50mm f/1.4 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f14_USM/index.asp). Both would make for an extremely usable lens on either a full-frame or a crop-sensor body and would give you the results you'd be looking for. Unfortunately I don't really know Nikon's range that well so I'd guess that you'd be wanting one of their 50mm line-up (http://www.europe-nikon.com/family/en_GB/categories/broad/23.html) although I couldn't tell you which one was the best. Perhaps even Sigma's Nikon-fit 50mm (http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/standard/50mm.htm) might work.

[daugirdas]

Nikon 50/1.4 or even better 105/2.8 VR micro. Both lenses will be excellent and hold value really well.

[buckas]

Blimey, I didn't think anyone took much notice of my ramblings about food photography. I've got a lot to live up to after that rather nice introduction by fabs and Tim!

Looking through your blog, KG, it seems like you are taking this whole thing quite seriously so I'm going to assume that you want to take the photography equally as seriously. And for that you're going to need to make a hefty investment - but luckily more in time than money, although you could spend as freely as you wanted to.

The first thing you're going to want to do is look at lighting and the good news there is that the best lighting for good food photography is free! As Tim has already mentioned, natural light really is the best and we're rapidly approaching that time of year where you've got plenty of it to work with. All you really need is a suitable room (or selection of rooms), something to diffuse the light, a load of reflectors and about five pairs of hands to hold them all. Or you can just get creative with lighting stands, blu-tack, etc. But the look that works best for me relies on a single large light source (the windows) and light being bounced back into the subject from every angle.

If at all possible I like to shoot in my lounge and at this time of year that gives me a working window of between 10am and roughly 4pm. I'm fortunate enough that it's south-facing and has a massive set of French windows at the end which allows loads of light to spill in and bounce around the room so it's really practical all-year-round Unfortunately the walls aren't quite the right colour, being a light-ish yellow, but I've got creative with white foam-core in the vital areas rather than redecorating. I also employ a large (2m²) diffuser to cover the window and soften the light and sometimes double-up when it's a really bright day or use a single thinner diffuser when it's slightly overcast but still too bright.

General rule of thumb for me is if you can put a shiny white plate in the sunlight and you're getting harsh reflections and dark shadows then it's time to get the diffuser(s) out. I've got a couple of really shiny dinner plates that don't see much use for my work but serve well as test subjects - try and track down at least one on your travels as it's a great help. Want to know what the best thing is? The cheapest and nastiest glazes are generally the best for testing so there's no need to spend a fortune on expensive china.

In terms of bouncing light around, I'll use whatever I can get my hands on, but I tend to favour white foam-core card. You can pick it up from your local craft supply store at a reasonable price, but it does get 'better' the more you pay. I tend to work with sizes from A3 up to A0 and try to buy the best stuff I can find as I've noticed the thinner 'cheap' stuff tends to start yellowing a lot quicker - and you don't want to be bouncing yellow-ish light around! Either way, store your card somewhere dark and try to keep it as spotless as possible.

If you really can't shoot during the optimum conditions or your 'studio' doesn't allow for decent light, you'll need to fake it. I find the most effective approach to be of trying to recreate the large single light source using artificial light so for that you'll need one (or more) large light sources. For me that means lights with big softboxes (I use Speedlites with Lastolite's 60cm Ezybox Hotshoe) and the same selection of reflectors and diffusers to recreate that 'flood' of light you get from the optimum natural lighting conditions. It all sounds simple and to be fair it's quite a simple theory but the method takes a lot of experimenting with to get right.

The benefit of using a system like the Speedlite/Ezybox Hotshoe combo is that it's incredibly portable and easy to set up on location or in conditions where you wouldn't necessarily get a set of studio lights in or even to. The downside is that it's an expensive way of doing things as you'll probably have to throw in some form of remote triggering (not sure what the equivalent of the ST-E2 is for Nikon users) or run the risk of cabling it all together.

Once you've got the lighting sorted and you're confident you can recreate your 'look' in various locations you can then start to worry about the equipment you're shooting with. The first bit of kit I'd recommend would be a sturdy tripod that's easy to position and a suitable head (I like geared three-way heads for fine adjustments) for the sort of work you'll be doing. If you'll be doing a lot of work in a studio then you might consider a camera stand, but that would be far too heavy to transport around so a decent tripod and head would probably make for a good long-term investment.

With regards to the body you are shooting with, I have to admit to having zero knowledge of Nikon cameras although from looking at the specifications it seems fine to me, especially if your output is mostly web-based at present. In reality it will be the glass on the front as much as the subject matter in front of you that will determine just how good your shots are but when you upgrade I'd highly recommend a camera with Live View functionality.

Now, to the glass. And here's where the problems start. I shoot with a 5D and Canon's TS-E 90mm f/2.8 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Tilt-and-Shift_Lenses/TS_E_90mm_f28/index.asp) tilt/shift lens. For me it's the perfect combination and I'd recommend any food photographer do the same. You get an amazingly sharp lens, excellent background blur, great contrast, an extremely usable focal length and minimum focus distance and the amazing creative control that a tilt/shift lens gives you.

Unfortunately you are a Nikon user and while I'd like to recommend their 85mm f/2.8 PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1665/overview.html) I've found their 24mm PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1550/overview.html) a tricky lens to get on with and from what I've read the 85mm will be more of the same. It just doesn't seem to function in the same way as the Canon and I find that incredibly frustrating. It doesn't even fit properly on some bodies! And let's face it - if you've bought a D60 you're hardly likely to be spending somewhere in the region of £1,300 on a lens alone.

So If I was going to buy a brand-new lens for food photography, I'd be spending my pennies on Canon's 50mm f/1.2L (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f12L_USM/index.asp) or even the 50mm f/1.4 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f14_USM/index.asp). Both would make for an extremely usable lens on either a full-frame or a crop-sensor body and would give you the results you'd be looking for. Unfortunately I don't really know Nikon's range that well so I'd guess that you'd be wanting one of their 50mm line-up (http://www.europe-nikon.com/family/en_GB/categories/broad/23.html) although I couldn't tell you which one was the best. Perhaps even Sigma's Nikon-fit 50mm (http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/standard/50mm.htm) might work.

superb advice there :thumbs:

[KitchenGoddess]

Blimey, I didn't think anyone took much notice of my ramblings about food photography. I've got a lot to live up to after that rather nice introduction by fabs and Tim!

Looking through your blog, KG, it seems like you are taking this whole thing quite seriously so I'm going to assume that you want to take the photography equally as seriously. And for that you're going to need to make a hefty investment - but luckily more in time than money, although you could spend as freely as you wanted to.

The first thing you're going to want to do is look at lighting and the good news there is that the best lighting for good food photography is free! As Tim has already mentioned, natural light really is the best and we're rapidly approaching that time of year where you've got plenty of it to work with. All you really need is a suitable room (or selection of rooms), something to diffuse the light, a load of reflectors and about five pairs of hands to hold them all. Or you can just get creative with lighting stands, blu-tack, etc. But the look that works best for me relies on a single large light source (the windows) and light being bounced back into the subject from every angle.

If at all possible I like to shoot in my lounge and at this time of year that gives me a working window of between 10am and roughly 4pm. I'm fortunate enough that it's south-facing and has a massive set of French windows at the end which allows loads of light to spill in and bounce around the room so it's really practical all-year-round Unfortunately the walls aren't quite the right colour, being a light-ish yellow, but I've got creative with white foam-core in the vital areas rather than redecorating. I also employ a large (2m²) diffuser to cover the window and soften the light and sometimes double-up when it's a really bright day or use a single thinner diffuser when it's slightly overcast but still too bright.

General rule of thumb for me is if you can put a shiny white plate in the sunlight and you're getting harsh reflections and dark shadows then it's time to get the diffuser(s) out. I've got a couple of really shiny dinner plates that don't see much use for my work but serve well as test subjects - try and track down at least one on your travels as it's a great help. Want to know what the best thing is? The cheapest and nastiest glazes are generally the best for testing so there's no need to spend a fortune on expensive china.

In terms of bouncing light around, I'll use whatever I can get my hands on, but I tend to favour white foam-core card. You can pick it up from your local craft supply store at a reasonable price, but it does get 'better' the more you pay. I tend to work with sizes from A3 up to A0 and try to buy the best stuff I can find as I've noticed the thinner 'cheap' stuff tends to start yellowing a lot quicker - and you don't want to be bouncing yellow-ish light around! Either way, store your card somewhere dark and try to keep it as spotless as possible.

If you really can't shoot during the optimum conditions or your 'studio' doesn't allow for decent light, you'll need to fake it. I find the most effective approach to be of trying to recreate the large single light source using artificial light so for that you'll need one (or more) large light sources. For me that means lights with big softboxes (I use Speedlites with Lastolite's 60cm Ezybox Hotshoe) and the same selection of reflectors and diffusers to recreate that 'flood' of light you get from the optimum natural lighting conditions. It all sounds simple and to be fair it's quite a simple theory but the method takes a lot of experimenting with to get right.

The benefit of using a system like the Speedlite/Ezybox Hotshoe combo is that it's incredibly portable and easy to set up on location or in conditions where you wouldn't necessarily get a set of studio lights in or even to. The downside is that it's an expensive way of doing things as you'll probably have to throw in some form of remote triggering (not sure what the equivalent of the ST-E2 is for Nikon users) or run the risk of cabling it all together.

Once you've got the lighting sorted and you're confident you can recreate your 'look' in various locations you can then start to worry about the equipment you're shooting with. The first bit of kit I'd recommend would be a sturdy tripod that's easy to position and a suitable head (I like geared three-way heads for fine adjustments) for the sort of work you'll be doing. If you'll be doing a lot of work in a studio then you might consider a camera stand, but that would be far too heavy to transport around so a decent tripod and head would probably make for a good long-term investment.

With regards to the body you are shooting with, I have to admit to having zero knowledge of Nikon cameras although from looking at the specifications it seems fine to me, especially if your output is mostly web-based at present. In reality it will be the glass on the front as much as the subject matter in front of you that will determine just how good your shots are but when you upgrade I'd highly recommend a camera with Live View functionality.

Now, to the glass. And here's where the problems start. I shoot with a 5D and Canon's TS-E 90mm f/2.8 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Tilt-and-Shift_Lenses/TS_E_90mm_f28/index.asp) tilt/shift lens. For me it's the perfect combination and I'd recommend any food photographer do the same. You get an amazingly sharp lens, excellent background blur, great contrast, an extremely usable focal length and minimum focus distance and the amazing creative control that a tilt/shift lens gives you.

Unfortunately you are a Nikon user and while I'd like to recommend their 85mm f/2.8 PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1665/overview.html) I've found their 24mm PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1550/overview.html) a tricky lens to get on with and from what I've read the 85mm will be more of the same. It just doesn't seem to function in the same way as the Canon and I find that incredibly frustrating. It doesn't even fit properly on some bodies! And let's face it - if you've bought a D60 you're hardly likely to be spending somewhere in the region of £1,300 on a lens alone.

So If I was going to buy a brand-new lens for food photography, I'd be spending my pennies on Canon's 50mm f/1.2L (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f12L_USM/index.asp) or even the 50mm f/1.4 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f14_USM/index.asp). Both would make for an extremely usable lens on either a full-frame or a crop-sensor body and would give you the results you'd be looking for. Unfortunately I don't really know Nikon's range that well so I'd guess that you'd be wanting one of their 50mm line-up (http://www.europe-nikon.com/family/en_GB/categories/broad/23.html) although I couldn't tell you which one was the best. Perhaps even Sigma's Nikon-fit 50mm (http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/standard/50mm.htm) might work.

Wow! Thank you so much for taking the time to give such an informative, helpful reply (and for the lovely comment about my blog too). I'm going to print off this info and make a list of the key points to focus on. :thumbs:

[fabs]

I knew he wouldn't let us down! :D

Great post Glitch, I'll print that one off myself! :thumbs:

[Kryptix]

I'd go for 50L or 50mm f/1.4 -- very shallow DoF. I'm not sure you'd want 'macro' when doing food in all honest. You'd get some superb shots with some lighting, a white backdrop and a 50mm of some sort IMO.

[glitch]

superb advice there :thumbs:Merci!

Wow! Thank you so much for taking the time to give such an informative, helpful reply (and for the lovely comment about my blog too). I'm going to print off this info and make a list of the key points to focus on. :thumbs:If there's one type of photography I'm happy to talk about it's food photography. It's all I think about, all I want to do.

Feel free to fire as many questions at me as you want and I'll do my best to answer them. And if I can't I'll be happy to research the answer as much as possible as it will benefit both of us!

I knew he wouldn't let us down! :D

Great post Glitch, I'll print that one off myself! :thumbs:You're welcome, sir! Glad I could be of some use.

I'd go for 50L or 50mm f/1.4 -- very shallow DoF. I'm not sure you'd want 'macro' when doing food in all honest. You'd get some superb shots with some lighting, a white backdrop and a 50mm of some sort IMO.Well, you might, but alas our KitchenGoddess is a Nikon user so doesn't have quite the same choice as you do.

But your comment does raise an interesting point.

As much as I don't like to even broach the subject for fear of invoking the wrath of the fanboys, I had toyed with the thought of suggesting that our KitchenGoddess might well think about spending her money on switching to Canon to take advantage of the lenses I've mentioned in my post above. I appreciate that's a bit 'can open, worms everywhere' but it would make a lot of sense.

[pearce_jj]

Blimey, I didn't think anyone took much notice of my ramblings about food photography. I've got a lot to live up to after that rather nice introduction by fabs and Tim!

You managed it - a great post :thumbs:

[KitchenGoddess]

Merci!

If there's one type of photography I'm happy to talk about it's food photography. It's all I think about, all I want to do.

Feel free to fire as many questions at me as you want and I'll do my best to answer them. And if I can't I'll be happy to research the answer as much as possible as it will benefit both of us!

You're welcome, sir! Glad I could be of some use.

Well, you might, but alas our KitchenGoddess is a Nikon user so doesn't have quite the same choice as you do.

But your comment does raise an interesting point.

As much as I don't like to even broach the subject for fear of invoking the wrath of the fanboys, I had toyed with the thought of suggesting that our KitchenGoddess might well think about spending her money on switching to Canon to take advantage of the lenses I've mentioned in my post above. I appreciate that's a bit 'can open, worms everywhere' but it would make a lot of sense.

I am beginning to wish I'd bought Canon now, but, the Jessops sale person talked me out of it :thumbsdown: Serious thinking time now I reckon.

[glitch]

I guess it all depends on how serious you are about this, KitchenGoddess. From repeated reading of your blog I'd assume that the answer to that was 'very' and as such I'd really recommend a switch to Canon, assuming the funds were available. I think you'd be able to produce perfectly adequate results with your Nikon but a switch would be worth it, if only for access to the 90mm TS-E lens that I mentioned in my first post. You really wouldn't regret it.

A comparable camera to your D60 would probably be Canon's 450D which would give you the extremely desirable Live View functionality along with access to Canon's range of lenses. Or there's always the 40D which is much the same, albeit in a slightly larger body with what I consider to be better handling. Either way you should be able to pick a mint second-hand 450D up for somewhere around £350 with the 40D costing around £100 more than that. I'm not 100% sure how a tilt/shift lens would perform on a crop sensor camera (I shoot on a full-frame 5D) but I can guarantee you that it will be much more usable on a Canon than the equivalent Nikon set-up.

And let's not forget you don't necessarily need to buy a load of lenses. If you spend all your budget on a new body you could simply hire the lenses you need for the days you'll be shooting - in effect a much more cost-effective way of using some excellent glass without the financial burden of ownership.

[KitchenGoddess]

The 40D is on a great offer at amazon, I'm going to re-evaluate my avilable finances and then make the decision ... it does look very good.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-Digital-Camera-incl-17-85mm/dp/B000V9H5J4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1244931243&sr=8-1

Looked at the 90mm TS-E lens too - the price too my breath away, nearly as much as the camera :eek:

[Hammerhead64]

I think the suggestion to the OP to change from Nikon to Canon on the basis that there are more lenses in the Canon format is ludicrous. As was stated early on in the thread the most important thing in this type of photography is the lighting.

It was agreed that natural light was the best so why? does the OP have to go to the expense of moving formats.

Surely just a good prime lens with f/2.8 or better or even a good quality short zoom at f/2.8 would suffice and some reflectors?

Come on peeps don't give advice based on biased preferences. Especially as the OP is new to the forum and is probably not aware of the Nikon/Canon "mine is better than yours" point of view.

[KitchenGoddess]

Now I'm going to be a real pain ... is the 50D worth splashing the extra cash do you reckon?

[StewartR]

I think the suggestion to the OP to change from Nikon to Canon on the basis that there are more lenses in the Canon format is ludicrous.It would be ludicrous if he had done that, but he didn't. glitch suggested the switch specifically to be able to use the Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8, which he recommends as the ultimate lens for food photography.

For what it's worth, I think he's probably right about the lens. Though whether or not it's worth switching in order to be able to use it is much more debatable. I guess it depends what level of food photography you're aiming at.

[glitch]

The 40D is on a great offer at amazon, I'm going to re-evaluate my avilable finances and then make the decision ... it does look very good.It really does come down to personal choice in these matters, but were I in your position I'd be strongly considering the second-hand market.

I've seen numerous decent examples going for around the £450 mark. In fact there's one (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=141591) for sale on these very forums, although I'm not sure if you'll be able to gain access to that thread.

Looked at the 90mm TS-E lens too - the price too my breath away, nearly as much as the camera :eek:The price might take your breath away but then again so will the results. But if you do switch, save your money for the time being and hire one to see if you like what it does before making an investment.

You could even hire a 40D body for a week along with the 90mm to see what it can do for you.

I think the suggestion to the OP to change from Nikon to Canon on the basis that there are more lenses in the Canon format is ludicrous.As Stewart has already pointed out, I didn't.

Now I'm going to be a real pain ... is the 50D worth splashing the extra cash do you reckon?Nope.

If you think that the 90mm TS-E is the lens for you a 40D would be more that adequate. Take advantage of all those with a 40D who 'need' the 50D and snap up a second-hand bargain.

For an idea of what a Tilt/Shift lens can do for your food photography, take a look at the example on this (http://www.savoryphotos.com/blog/2007/02/californias-nutty-food-photographer.html) page.

[SLRist]

<snip>

Now, to the glass. And here's where the problems start. I shoot with a 5D and Canon's TS-E 90mm f/2.8 (http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Tilt-and-Shift_Lenses/TS_E_90mm_f28/index.asp) tilt/shift lens. For me it's the perfect combination and I'd recommend any food photographer do the same. You get an amazingly sharp lens, excellent background blur, great contrast, an extremely usable focal length and minimum focus distance and the amazing creative control that a tilt/shift lens gives you.

Unfortunately you are a Nikon user and while I'd like to recommend their 85mm f/2.8 PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1665/overview.html) I've found their 24mm PC-E (http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1550/overview.html) a tricky lens to get on with and from what I've read the 85mm will be more of the same. It just doesn't seem to function in the same way as the Canon and I find that incredibly frustrating. It doesn't even fit properly on some bodies! And let's face it - if you've bought a D60 you're hardly likely to be spending somewhere in the region of £1,300 on a lens alone.

<snip>


Is this perhaps the reason why you didn't get along with it?

Quote from here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/24mm-pc.htm

Tip: If you're a landscape photographer like me, be sure to send your 24mm PC in to Nikon service before you shoot to have the lens recombobulated by 90 degrees so you can get rise/fall and tilt at the same time. As shipped, you get swing, not tilt, with rise/fall.

I'd imagine the 85mm would come configured the same way.

[singlespeed]

Without going full-frame to give the same result with the 90mm, surely the results would be different due to the crop factor. A 60mm lens on the Nikon D60 would give the same length as 90mm on the full frame Canon.

Unless the tilt/shift is essential for perspective adjustment when shooting food, as you mention the Nikon tilt/shift lenses are dificult to use, what does the Cannon switch give that a Sigma f1.4 woud not, except giving another set of focal plane adjustment variables to get to grips with allong with lighting, composition, etc. Glitch, you did after all mention "if you've bought a D60 you're hardly likely to be spending somewhere in the region of £1,300 on a lens alone".

The Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX DG HSM worked very nicely on my D60, giving excellent sharpness for the focus area, whilst the large aperture blured the background... before I bought mine, I struggled to find a bad word about it, except for the price and a 77mm filter size. Theres also the Nikon offering avaliable now, which is cheaper, but I haven't tried it or looked at any reviews.

[glitch]

Is this perhaps the reason why you didn't get along with it?No, it wasn't that.

Up until the introduction of Canon's most recent (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09021806canon17mm24mmtselenses.asp) TS-E lenses the tilt and shift functions of both the Canon and Nikon range were fixed in separate planes; you could either have one or the other, but not both. A bit of tinkering with a screwdriver (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/modify_canon_tilt-shift.html) and you could put both the tilt and the shift in the same plane, although I've not yet found a use for that with my 90mm TS-E.

What frustrates me about the Nikon range is that you only get the full functionality of the lens with the high-end camera bodies. With anything else the lenses abilities are somewhat restricted and in some cases almost unusable - some Nikon bodies won't allow for the full range of movement from the tilt or shift function because of their design.

The Canon TS-E lenses just work. I don't have to worry about focusing or metering before I tilt my lens and I can concentrate on what's in front of me at the time rather than having to faff about.

[KitchenGoddess]

I'm a bit odd about buying new stuff (don't laugh too much) so wouldn't mind paying out for new. Out of interest what would the 50d give me that the 40d wouldn't?

[glitch]

Well, that's understandable. But you can find some incredibly good deals on second-hand gear, particularly from some of the members here who generally take very good care of their equipment.

The main differences between the 40D and 50D are summarised here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/) but some of that might go completely over your head. What you're really getting is a larger resolution sensor (15MP v 10.1MP), slightly improved image processing (DIGIC IV v DIGIC III), a higher-resolution LCD on the back and a slightly better implementation of the Live View system.

The 40D can be had from around £600 (http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod576.html) new and the 50D from around £825 (http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod721.html) new. Worth the extra? Mmmm, possibly.

Whereabouts are you located? If you were local-ish I'd be happy to show you what the 90mm TS-E can do.

[KitchenGoddess]

I'm in Stafford.

The lens supplied with the 50d I've seen is a tamron 18-270mm macro canon fit, which sounds good to me.

I'll probably go for that ... I don't want to upgrade the body again for quite sometime.

[glitch]

That's a bit of a 'jack of all trades, master of none' lens so if you are set on a 50D I'd only really recommend the extra spend if it was an absolute bargain to get them both.

However, I'm still a bit uncomfortable about recommending you switch from Nikon to Canon based purely on the one lens. There are one or two others that you won't find an equivalent in Nikon's line-up but they're probably out of your price range and not necessarily a reason to switch.

And unfortunately you're about 200 miles away from me so I can't easily show you what the 90mm TS-E can do. I'll try and post up some examples when I find the hard-drive they're stored on.

[KitchenGoddess]

Please don't feel uncomfortable, I was thinking of upgrading anyway and all you've done is give me the slight push I needed to make the decision.

The other lens option is a 17-85mm one. Do you think that would be better? They're both the same price.

[singlespeed]

Wether you stay with Nikon, or switch to Canon, the one thing they have in common is quality lenses are worth more in image quality terms than a body upgrade (unless you take a huge leap up the ladder and reach the top rung ). Putting a lens with average image quality on a relatively good body will still give average shots, where as upgrading the glass to something with a larger aperture (smaller f number) which would be more suited to your style of shooting would improve the shots and give you more scope to be creative with the depth of field. The bonus here is the lens can be used on a future body upgrade if/when you need/want to upgrade.

If you do decide on the switch, unless you specify a lens particularly suited to your needs, you will end up in the same position as you are at the moment with a reasonable body and an average lens for your needs. Unless you have found a particular point of hatred for the D60, a lens upgrade would be of more use!!!

Whatever you decide, zooms with a large range will generaly make more sacrifices in image quality than a short zoom range. Also the maximum aperture size( smallest f number) being constant ie- 18-70mm f2.8, where theres only one f number means, that aperture is avaliable through the zoom range. Unlike your standard kit lens, which has a range of f stops 18-55mm f3.5-5.6. As the zoom increases from 18mm, the maximum avaliable aperture will increase from f3.5 up to f5.6 when you reach the 55mm end. The numbers themselves don't always tell the full tale, as theres some f2.8 lenses which allegedly have poor image quality, so have a good read up or get a recomendation before parting with your hard earned.

I am sure that most others here would agree that a quality lens with the posibility of a shallow DOF would be more use than changing bodies, unless you also get the better glass to go with it.

[KitchenGoddess]

Thanks Singlespeed. I'm determined to switch to canon now and the 50D seems to suit my needs best. I reckon I'd go with the 18-55mm lens supplied but add to it with a constant f2.8 lens too.

[singlespeed]

Thanks Singlespeed. I'm determined to switch to canon now and the 50D seems to suit my needs best. I reckon I'd go with the 18-55mm lens supplied but add to it with a constant f2.8 lens too.

I am guessing it must be the live view feature has swayed you, so you can see your picture as you compose it, then zoom in for accurate focusing on selected areas. If thats the case, and you are going to be spending around £1000 on a new camera, make sure you get the one thats most comfortable for YOU to hold and use. the Nikon D90 and D300 have live view, so theres a few bodies to try and hold before making a firm decision purely based on numbers and prices or a whim.

Whatever you decide on at the semi-pro crop sensor level, i'm sure you will be happy for a while :lol:

Budget for a replacement memory card as well. The 50D and Nikon D300 are compact flash, not SD.

This might be usefull
50D review against 40D and D90, D300 (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_50D/verdict.shtml)

[Hammerhead64]

It would be ludicrous if he had done that, but he didn't. glitch suggested the switch specifically to be able to use the Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8, which he recommends as the ultimate lens for food photography.

For what it's worth, I think he's probably right about the lens. Though whether or not it's worth switching in order to be able to use it is much more debatable. I guess it depends what level of food photography you're aiming at.

I'm sorry I never said he did.

Glitch I was not directing my comment to any one post in particular it just seemed to me that at the point of my post the thread had taken a very Canon biased view.

I appologise to you ..... no offence was meant. I was in fact very impressed with the reply and help you offered.

If the OP is of the opinion that a move to a Canon body will improve any shots taken I am afraid that may be a possible error as the advice given to date is clear that this type of photography is about setup/lighting and not the kit brand you own and I think the advice that singlespeed offers is very astute.

The choice is of course up to the OP and very good luck on the journey as someone who switched from one brand to another I can say from experience if it is right for you then it is right.

[KitchenGoddess]

If the OP is of the opinion that a move to a Canon body will improve any shots taken I am afraid that may be a possible error as the advice given to date is clear that this type of photography is about setup/lighting and not the kit brand you own and I think the advice that singlespeed offers is very astute.



I'm not under that impression at all. I know I need to work on my basic skills/lighting/setup etc etc a great deal but I do feel that with a better 'base' I'll manage to do that more easily. I have never been overly happy with the D60 Nikon since I bought it ... it was a rushed choice and I was far to influenced by a desire for a quick purchase and the desire to not have to save up for as long as I otherwise would have.

[KitchenGoddess]

I've just been looking at these lenses http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0008G2P72/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE and http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005K47X/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

Instead of getting the kit lens do you think these two would be better?

[Hammerhead64]

You have a clear reason for making the change so good luck to you. I am sure with the excellent assistance that glitch has put on here you will do fine. As I said I made the difficult choice to sell up a lot of kit to go to my current camera and start afresh it's not easy and i'm glad that I did. I think most people find that kit lenses are fine to start off with but once you get involved with taking more critical shots you quickly find the kit lenses limited. You may find a simple prime lens ("nifty 50" 50mm f1.8 for example) will start you off and would not necessarilly break the bank. this would allow you to identify what more expensive lens you would need in the future. This is just a suggestion and I am sure the more learned members in this thread will soon put me right if this is wrong.
This is all very difficult as there are so many options. :thumbs:

[KitchenGoddess]

I'm going into town to look at a D50 today, have one lined up on amazon to buy if I like it. Wish me luck :)

[singlespeed]

I've just been looking at these lenses http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0008G2P72/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE and http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005K47X/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

Instead of getting the kit lens do you think these two would be better?
These two? Are you considering getting one or both?

Being as theres only 10mm difference between them, you wouldn't gain much flexibility. As an example, its the same as 46.8mm and 56.25mm on your D60 (being as the canon has a crop factor of 1.6 instead od 1.5 on the nikon)... so you should be able to get an idea of the field of view from your D60 and kit lens at the above zooms. Yes, I know you can only get up to 55mm, but its close enough to show what I mean.

The 50mm f1.8 II does sound like a bargain, but it has been built to the bargain price by the use of plastic throughout. It may not be the easiest to use if you fancy manualy focussing, due to the small focussing ring. Image wise, I wouldn't personaly have a clue, but DPreview conclusion is
"Overall conclusion
The Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II may be one of the cheapest lenses currently on the market, but its optics belie its lowly price. As befits a classic standard prime lens, it's very sharp when stopped down (especially in the centre), shows minimal chromatic aberration, and has relatively low distortion; APS-C users will also benefit from extremely low vignetting. In most regards it comes very close indeed to its much more expensive bigger brother, the EF 50mm F1.4 USM, lagging marginally behind in corner sharpness at any specific aperture. The only real blight in imaging terms is the lens's bokeh, or rendition of out-of-focus backgrounds, which is anything but smooth with a distinct tendency to render bright highlights as obvious pentagons (it's a pity Canon didn't choose to use a diaphragm with 7 or 8 blades instead of 5)."


If you intend to use the lens wide open, then the cheapest route may not be the best

[glitch]

I've just been looking at these lenses http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0008G2P72/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE and http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005K47X/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

Instead of getting the kit lens do you think these two would be better?Are you literally buying into Canon specifically for your blog or will you be using the camera and lens(es) for other purposes?

I would hesitate from spending any more than you really need to and stick with the basics for now. A macro lens won't really be of much use to you (been there, done that) but I reckon a 50mm would be. And while that particular version isn't really the best of the bunch, it is cheap and it will certainly get you off and running for now.

If you're set on a Canon I'd buy the 50D body, a remote control (RS-80N3 or equivalent) and the Ef-S Super Precision Matte focusing screen. That's an invaluable addition for food photography as it allows you to have complete control over your manual focusing (which you'll be doing a fair bit of) and will really help you pinpoint the precise areas of the food you want to draw the eye to.

Perhaps go for the 50mm f/1.8 as something to use with the body and get to grips with the change of system but save your pennies for some better glass. And don't forget the option of hiring - there's a few places that will hire you lenses for a perfectly reasonable sum of money and give you access to the best equipment but at a price you can afford to pay.

In fact, I'd say you could get away with using the 50mm for your everyday work and then just hire in some better glass when you're going for those final shots that will take pride of place on the blog.

[Raymond Lin]

glitch, can we see some samples of your work, i take photos of food (mainly my dinner) a lot too !

[singlespeed]

I love food shopping, be it in real or virtual shops. It could in fact be argued very successfully that I have a dreadful ‘Amazon‘ habit.

[Hammerhead64]

I'm going into town to look at a D50 today, have one lined up on amazon to buy if I like it. Wish me luck :)

Kitchengoddess I presume you mean a Canon 50D not a Nikon D50.

I must admit to being a bit confused as to the reason you need to convert from a Nikon D60 to a Canon 50D now? I would say that this change will initially make it more difficult to get the high quality results you are striving for.

If I am right (as your questions seem to imply) that you are new to Photography it is more important to understand the photography basics as mentioned previously, before moving onto a more complicated setup. I am not sure about Canon kit but I am of the understanding that a 50D is equivalent to a D300 in complexity. If this is the case the camera is likely to require more setting up than the D60 which is for a more general consumer market. If you look at the results you can achieve on this type of camera with a decent prime lens I think you will save yourself a great deal of hard saving and unecessary spending. Give yourself a chance to find out what the D60 is limiting you in creatively before switching. At the end of the day it is a decision for you, just make sure it's not the salesman doing that for you?

Paul

[KitchenGoddess]

I see you've been reading my blog Singlespeed. Hope you like what you saw :)

[KitchenGoddess]

I absolutely loved the feel of the 50d and have ordered it along with the kit lends and 50mm. Glitch I'll add the screen to my order, it looks very useful. Thanks for pointing it out.

I will mainly be doing photography for my blog atm but I
am in the process of writing a cookbook that I'd be aiming to self publish so it would be good (and cost effective) to do my own photography.

[Hammerhead64]

Congrats on that :thumbs:

[singlespeed]

I see you've been reading my blog Singlespeed. Hope you like what you saw :)
It was only a quick look realy, to have a look what your trying to acheive.

Theres a couple of tasty looking photos there, but quite a few of them look rather flat and un-interesting. If you haven't already taken the 50D plunge, you should realy give some more thought getting to grips with some creative lighting to give texture and form, with proper focusing control and use of DOF to emphasise the subject. Sorry for being blunt, but a new body wouldn't help much, and has been pointed out, it may be worse as theres less done for you on higher spec bodies
... if you realy do need an Amazon fix, an SB-600 speed light and hotshoe cable, coupled with a tripod would make a much better investment to get some off-camera flash going on. These could be used later if you still have to upgrade.

Red Snapper tripods are highly recomended on here.


I see you took the plunge, so the SB-600 being nikon may not be the best bet.

[KitchenGoddess]

I didn't do this for "an amazon fix" but out of a desire to become the best photographer I can. I do realise I have an awful lot to learn but learn I will.

[singlespeed]

I didn't do this for "an amazon fix" but out of a desire to become the best photographer I can. I do realise I have an awful lot to learn but learn I will.


Good on you then. I'm sure that once you get to grips with it, the 50D will give you excellent quality results and probably not need upgrading for some time to come :thumbs:

[glitch]

glitch, can we see some samples of your work, i take photos of food (mainly my dinner) a lot too !I'm afraid all I've got to hand are these rather small samples of some of my older work.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-1.jpg http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-8.jpg
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-7.jpg http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-6.jpg
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-3.jpg http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-4.jpg
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-5.jpg http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/3068/Image-2.jpg

KitchenGoddess; if you'd rather these were taken elsewhere, please say the word. I wouldn't want to derail what's so far been a somewhat successful thread.

[Hammerhead64]

Glitch, those really are pro quality do you produce these for publication? If not you should, would be worth contacting the publishers of various cooks/chefs.

[KitchenGoddess]

KitchenGoddess; if you'd rather these were taken elsewhere, please say the word. I wouldn't want to derail what's so far been a somewhat successful thread.

Goodness no! Not in the slightest. It's lovely to see your work here, anyhow it inspires me to see what I might one day be able to achieve.

Hope you don't mind me showing this but I was very happy with it (well I think it's my best so far and I've had a few compliments on a couple of food forums I'm on):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3347/3620306776_8d1cdd832e.jpg

but I do feel a bit lame seeing it next to your masterpieces Glitch

[Raymond Lin]

Nice, i can see the criteria I think?

Clear, clean, minimal colours (apart from the food), even exposure (no harsh shadows).

[failingretina]

60mm Macro f/2.8
close focusing possibilities, sharp, large apertures, portrait focal length?

[KitchenGoddess]

It was only a quick look realy, to have a look what your trying to acheive.

Theres a couple of tasty looking photos there, but quite a few of them look rather flat and un-interesting. If you haven't already taken the 50D plunge, you should realy give some more thought getting to grips with some creative lighting to give texture and form, with proper focusing control and use of DOF to emphasise the subject. Sorry for being blunt, but a new body wouldn't help much, and has been pointed out, it may be worse as theres less done for you on higher spec bodies
... if you realy do need an Amazon fix, an SB-600 speed light and hotshoe cable, coupled with a tripod would make a much better investment to get some off-camera flash going on. These could be used later if you still have to upgrade.

Red Snapper tripods are highly recomended on here.


I see you took the plunge, so the SB-600 being nikon may not be the best bet.

If you want a better look at my photography, many of my 'better' attempts can be seen here:
http://www.tastespotting.com/profile/Kitchen%20Goddess

[KitchenGoddess]

I've just set up a savings 'pot' for the 50mm 1.2L and a tilt shift lens but would you reccomend the 90mm or 45mm one? Maybe by Christmas I'll be able to afford one of them:thumbs: