Prime Lens for taking Babies
- Thread starter Saycheese78
- Start date
- Status
shareoffroad
New Member
i use 24/2.8, and 85/1.8...quite good budget option but works well with my D70 and FM2n....
Corner should be ok if you're using DX. Haven't tried the lens on FX, so I can't comment.
I have the 30, 50 and 85 and 99% of my baby photos are with the 30. Corner sharpness isn't really a problem when taking portraits unless for some reason you like your in-focus subjects to be right at the corner... otherwise most of the time it'll just be bokeh.
Also, during the first couple of months, the babies will probably be indoor most of the time so the faster the lens the better.
Also, during the first couple of months, the babies will probably be indoor most of the time so the faster the lens the better.
Last edited:
if u liked 35f2, I think you won't regret having a Sigma30mmF1.4...I understand what you mean. The wife prefers my 55-200mm lens to my 16-85mm lens. I think it is a sharp issue too.. Just that babies may be fine. Whats more, to shell out $750, might as well get a 50F1.8 + 35F2 combi... But the 60F2.8 is still a good lens to own.. congrats for having that.
It seems that a lot of people are telling me 50mm is a bit restrictive.. Hmm I am getting swayed towards the 35F2... But I wonder hows the corner sharpness..
If you really wan a macro lens, maybe you would like to consider the old 60mmF2.8 which is slightly faster in focus when you are too near your active baby..
For women, definately... sigma 30mmf1.4 or 24-70mmf2.8(heavy thou)..
Saycheese78
New Member
Hmm Women? U refer to Ladies photographer or Models?
I went to nikon showroom but closed.
Did some quick experiments.
ISO 800, distance around 1m with a 30cm tall teddy bear. 1m away from a window on shady day.
Distance
50mm. Very restrictive. Need >1.5m to capture the whole bear.. Distance too far to communicate with the model (baby) and shoot.
35mm. Just nice. 30mm nicer.
Shutter
F4.5. Shutter 1/10s. Thus upgrading to F2.0, I probably can set to shutter of 1/20 s to 1/30 s.
Conclusion, for baby shots, F1.4 lens is prefered. Yesh Sigma 30mmF1.4 is the prefered lens if got budget. But 35F2.0 is cheap. 60mm F2.8 is too long, too slow. Thus my all in one dream of just buy 1 lens for 3 purpose not possible.
ah... u also found out the reason why i eventually sold off the 50s and went for the 35. :bsmilie:
Saycheese78
New Member
Haha nightwolf, when I eventually decide to have my own kid (maybe next 1-2 years), haha... well, yr kids are now children and not babies right..haha... well.... no need 35F2 any more, you need 85F1.4.....
Hmm see how the next 2-3 mths.. got friends with babies coming from Jan to Mid year... looks like a good series to train up my skills. actually got 1 colleague got 3 mths old baby liao.. hmmm..
Hay, whats the problem with 35F2 as portrait lens? Got pple complain make yr nose look big.. Big nose means lots of wealth leh... Perfect for shooting babies.. haha
Saycheese78
New Member
Ok now, to finish off the discussion, have the price changed from that last updated on our nikon price list?
zac08
Senior Member
If you are really that interested, please help us and call up the shops and let us know if there are any changes so far.
erm.. unless you go really close. then again, it is rather normal for WA (yes... in days gone by, 35mm WAS wide-angle). see wat happened to my son's photo when i was testing out the MO ringflash.
if you keep it within reasonable distance, actually it is a very good lens. took this of my girl some months back with my F80 @ f2 on some cheap china film. this is how the lens is suppose to look like on a full-frame camera. ;p
yap agree with your choice.... I use 50mm/f1.8 and 35mm/f2 to shoot my kiddo also... would prefer a 50mm/f1.4 but then... no $$$$.... :cry:....
You can bring both lens and try out....
I am using a D80 and besides the 18-135 kit, the only other lens I have is the 50 1.8. For me, it's a no brainer to buy the 50 1.8 because it's cheap and light and serves my photographic purpose although at times, I admit it's rather restrictive but I use it to shoot portraits of our daughter when she is engrossed in watching tv or other things to keep her preoccupied. Here are couple of her portraits:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3249/2844468673_5f31d2e104.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/2654827098_60e3025b81.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3249/2844468673_5f31d2e104.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/2654827098_60e3025b81.jpg
Saycheese78
New Member
Hi
85mm is actually used by Pros in their studios on DX cameras. However, there is lots of space and they can designate a shooting area in their studio. Sometimes, they have to climb up to shoot down for top down shots, especially since babies are often lying on their back in 1st 6 mths.
Anyway, I enquired about the price of Nikkor 35F2 and it still cost $499. Adding this to the cost of my 16-85, wow, I am not extremely far from a Nikkor 17-55F2.8! So a bit reluctant to shell out the $, especially the 16-85 performs ok from F4-F5 @ 30mm.
Getting the Sigma 30F1.4 or Nikkor 50F1.4D is another story because it offer a much wider aperture. But I think I would rather own the 17-55F2.8 than a 16-85 + 30F1.4 combi at the moment.
Sigh.. So reality means I will choose between the 50F1.8 or 50F1.4 (most likely)., although I agree with you guys that 30-35mm is the BEST shooting range. Anyway, the wife is excite that i may get a portrait lens.. haha....
- Status
Similar threads
