Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Which lens for newborn, baby, children photography


mhancock 5 8 South Africa
11 Aug 2009 8:49PM
I have recently started photographing newborn babies and children. I have found my 70-200mm f/2.8 really good for outdoor shots of children, however am debating what lens I should buy for indoor/studio shots for newborn babies?
do I go with fixed focal length? what f-number? 50mm/85mm/90mm??
Any advice?

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 8 1.5k 1
11 Aug 2009 9:04PM
The lens you have is the best lens you could possibly have for this sort of photography 70mm for the full length shots and 200mm for the head shots when the baby is looking away from the camera. If you are working with natural light the 85mm 1.8 will work well.
monkeygrip 6 574 6 England
11 Aug 2009 9:05PM
You dont say which make of camera you use but I use the canon 50mm f1.4 and it is fantastic, not to hard on the pocket either.

Stu
Paul Morgan Plus
14 16.9k 6 England
11 Aug 2009 9:16PM
A 50mm or Lensbaby, irrespective of camera make Smile
mhancock 5 8 South Africa
11 Aug 2009 9:27PM
thanks. I have a canon 30D and was looking at one of the 50mm lenses, just a debate on the 1.4 or 1.8 financially... is it not even worth looking at the 1.8 compared to the 1.4? why wouldn't you go with a fixed 90mm or 85mm?
User_Removed 13 2.8k 11 United Kingdom
11 Aug 2009 9:44PM
Washable!
bppowell 13 2.1k 2 England
11 Aug 2009 9:51PM
I would second the 50mm. If you are doing portraiture you can be faily close to the subject.

Barry
User_Removed 8 1.5k 1
11 Aug 2009 9:58PM
50mm 1.8 is just as good as the 1.4. Some of the sharpest photos i have taken is with the 50mm 1.8.
mhancock 5 8 South Africa
11 Aug 2009 10:00PM
isn't there a debate about the 1.8 being made of really cheap plastic and is easily breakable?
User_Removed 7 736 4
11 Aug 2009 10:03PM
Holds up well against projectile vomit though. Seriously though, I'd be tempted to go for my standard portrait lens which is the Tamron 90mm macro f2.8 (I did have the 85mm 1.8 Nikkor but found they were doubling up so I decided in favour of close-focusing - the Nikkor is a top lens though and I was sad to see it go).
UUilliam 5 10 Scotland
11 Aug 2009 10:25PM
I Can totally recommend the 50mm f1.8, I have one, Great lens and feels awesome.. (although you may want a verticle grip with it... sets the camera off nicely Tongue)

But i would seriously recommend the 35mm as it gives you a wider angle thus allowing you to shoot in smaller rooms.
User_Removed 8 1.5k 1
11 Aug 2009 10:33PM

Quote:Isn't there a debate about the 1.8 being made of really cheap plastic and is easily breakable?


In a studio environment you wont have a problem. If your going to have an accident with a lens your better smashing one up that only costs 70 than breaking a lens worth hundreds of pounds and having a huge repair bill.
SuziBlue 12 16.2k 10 Scotland
11 Aug 2009 10:37PM
The 1.8 is fab. I love it to bits. Some of my personal faves were taken with one. As for being vomitproof - I don't know. Not trialling it either Wink
User_Removed 7 736 4
11 Aug 2009 10:38PM
Sorry, but I thought it was a joke about being cheap plastic and easily broken.......50mm (whether 1.8 or 1.4) is usually considered to be a great lens (i.e. fantastic quality) for a ridiculously reasonable price.
mhancock 5 8 South Africa
12 Aug 2009 7:33AM
thanks for this. it's been really helpful. I'm off to the shops to try both 50mm 1.4 and 1.8

Has anyone tried both these lenses? does the USM on the 1.4 make a big difference?

and when talking about the 1.8 is this the MK1 OR 11 version? i've heard the 1 is much better, but obviously not for sale anymore

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.