do I need more stuff to shoot my baby ?

jimH · 10-15-2010, 07:52 AM

Originally posted by taurus9

I will also vouch for the previous posters' suggestion on getting an external flash that can swivel and allow bounce flash.

In addition, a flash diffuser is an essential addition to your flash. It greatly improves the light distribution and kills the harshness of a naked flash. I use a Sto-Fen diffuser with my Pentax AF-540FGZ flash and I am very happy with the results that I obtain with it.

Ikarus · 10-15-2010, 11:56 AM

I agree that a flash will be good to have once they start running around, but for the OP, my advice is to defer that decision until he actually has to deal with it and to focus on what he needs now. Personally, I would be less concerned about the flash doing physical harm to a baby's eyes, but with the fact that it tends to startle them and interferes with my approach of doing lots of shots in a row without disturbing the intimacy of the moment. Of course, it would be even better if the shutter of the K-x weren't so damn loud. ;-)

Another one with the Super-Takumar 50/1.4:

Pentaxor · 10-15-2010, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by Hello_Photo

With respect to a flash "hurting" a child's eyes, I'm pretty sure that's bunk. I'm not a doctor, but I've been blazing away at my 1 and 3 year-olds with a flash since they were born (primarily with indirect/bounce flash), and they haven't displayed any ill-effects. Naturally, you need to be comfortable with your own decision on this.

as long as it's not direct, it wouldn't hurt.

Pentaxor · 10-15-2010, 12:38 PM

I don't feel the need for the OP to have a good flash for now. I mean, it's a baby. the OP can always buy the flash at a later time when the baby can virtually run around, which would be in a few years. the OP can instead use the built-in flash of the k-m and buy a puffer or a lightscoop to spread out the light more evenly or balanced. for babies, a 1/180 shutterspeed flash exposure would be enough to give you the much needed freezing motion. buy an external flash only when the right time comes.

as far as lens suggestion is concerned, the DA40 is enough and there's no need for another one. just save the money to purchase or fund something else.

as far as a P&S camera is concerned, if the M4/3 cameras are not that big for the OP, I would recommend him/her either an Oly Epl-1 with the lens or Panasonic G2. if he/she wants to push it to further to excellent HD video capability, the GH1 would be the perfect fit in terms of video performance and price budget (if you are able to find a copy for $500-$600 for the body only).

dreamfall · 10-15-2010, 01:25 PM

Thank you all! I appreciate every reply.

I bought my DA40 less than a year and like it very much, but if I knew I would have a baby so early I would have got FA 50/1.4 instead. I had always been longing for a better compact camera, so I will get one with HD first. (Great now I have a reason!) Currently I like canon S95, simply because it's small size and have a HD, but I'll wait till its price is more reasonable.

As most of you have suggested, my km+DA40 may work fine after the baby is born at first. From now on, I will also keep an eye on a flash, which I always want because I like shoot food.

Thanks!

Alice

CEWren · 10-15-2010, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by Pablom

Don't shoot your baby! I know they can be a pain sometimes but you better deal with it or give him away to someone who wants him as a last resort

glad I wasnt the only one who found a bit of humor in the wording!

shooting babies is wrong!!

-

I think a nice p & s would be nice, but dunno how you could go back to a p & s once having a dslr??? I have a toddler and i take my bulky pentax with us everywhere..

littledrawe · 10-15-2010, 08:58 PM

First off you have a great set up! I have the same equipment, I was surprised to see someone else with it because the K2000 doesnt seem too popular but that is beside the point. I have this flash
Camera Flashes
and it suits me just fine, a third of the price of the pentax brand with the same adjustability. The DA L 40 mm is great, don't jump ship for the 50 mm like everyone else seems to be telling you just yet. Check out the thread for the DA Limited club here
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74194-da-limited-club.html
not all the images are from the 40 mm but there are several that are labeled as such and that lens does some amazing things. I posted some of my friends 6 month old toward the end of the thread that I took with my 40 mm. My wife is just about to have our first next month and I plan to do my first shoot of him with my 40 mm. Good luck.

K2000 users need to speak up more

akanarya · 10-16-2010, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by littledrawe

First off you have a great set up! I have the same equipment, I was surprised to see someone else with it because the K2000 doesnt seem too popular but that is beside the point. I have this flash
Camera Flashes
and it suits me just fine, a third of the price of the pentax brand with the same adjustability. The DA L 40 mm is great, don't jump ship for the 50 mm like everyone else seems to be telling you just yet. Check out the thread for the DA Limited club here
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74194-da-limited-club.html
not all the images are from the 40 mm but there are several that are labeled as such and that lens does some amazing things. I posted some of my friends 6 month old toward the end of the thread that I took with my 40 mm. My wife is just about to have our first next month and I plan to do my first shoot of him with my 40 mm. Good luck.

K2000 users need to speak up more

you will need when it starts to move. congrats.

ndolling · 10-16-2010, 01:37 AM

I went through the exact same exercise 6-7 months ago.

I settled on the DA70 at the time.. it was my first Pentax glass and I was instantly hooked by the improvement over the Sigma zoom it replaced*.

I got some great photos, however I found that 70mm was a bit long for indoor shooting a newborn, and also that I could have used a little faster than f/2.4 (our daughter was born in Autumn, and we live in the Adelaide Hills, so for the first few months of her life, the blinds were drawn to keep the heat in, so the light was not great).

I borrowed an M 50/1.7 and got some nice pics with this too, but found the manual focus (or my slowness using it) was a problem (I also hadn't discovered "Catch In Focus" mode). Also, even at 50mm I found if she was lying on the bed, I had to stand on the bed to get most of her in the frame, so I reckon the 40 is probably just right.

I also tried the flash (AF540FGZ, bounced), but it still seemed to startle her, so I tried to stick to natural light.

Nick

*Since then LBA has hit me hard

JSherman999 and his damn 15mm limited mind control thread was the start, and then those DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 "Show us what it can do" threads pushed me over the edge..

I sold the 2 kit lenses and the DA70, and now have a DA*55/1.4 for nice indoor low light work and nice bokeh, a DA*16-50 and a DA*50-135... oh, and a significantly lighter wallet.

Here are a few examples :

DA70 @ f/2.4 1/60 (1 week old)

View Picture EXIF

Name: IMGP4980.jpg
Views: 300
Size: 84.8 KB

M 50 @ f/1.7 1/40 (3 months old - standing on bed, only light source was a 75W bulb overhead)
Name: IMGP0848.jpg
Views: 370
Size: 81.2 KB

DA*55 @ f/1.4 1/50 (4 months old)
Name: IMGP1121.jpg
Views: 343
Size: 84.7 KB

DA*16-50 @ 50mm f/2.8 1/50 (6 months old)

View Picture EXIF

Name: IMGP1946.jpg
Views: 300
Size: 68.6 KB

whojammyflip · 10-22-2010, 07:24 AM

Cracking last photo there of your nipper.

No one has mentioned it, but you could try picking up an old film body and pushing black and white TRI-X to 1600. In combination with a M50/1.7 on a ME Super, I am getting some nice shots. The split screen is great for focussing manually. This is roughly equivalent to your DA 40 on DSLR, I reckon. Full frame (ie 35mm film) offers even less depth of field though for the same field of view, due to using longer focal lengths. I've got a load of lenses, and the 50mm is the one I end up using, or the macro 50mm for very close-up photos. Actually, I've got some lovely pics of hands and feet using the M50/4: a macro could be a good one to look out for. One of the problems with the film approach is the time it takes...something of a rare commodity after having a new baby.

If you have the cash, it may be worth looking into the faster lenses (like FA Ltds) for dreamy depth of field effects, which are more appropriate when trying to do things like isolate the eyes. I'd do this, but I currently have 3 SLR bodies, several lenses, a ist DS, a darkroom, etc spilling over. Difficult to justify further expense.

The main thing is to make sure you take photos. I just picked up a little Nikon s220 for the wife. Funny thing is, I end up using that too, even though the IQ stinks in comparison to my Pentax stuff, as its always there. Certainly though, these mini digital cameras are really only good for cr@ppy photos for sharing on the interweb.

Mechan1k · 10-23-2010, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by simico

Pick up a P-TTL flash with swivel head (e.g. Metz 48) for indirect bounced flash. It helps a lot when there's not enough light. DA40 should be sufficient in all cases with bounced flash, I used the kit lens and DA17-70 f/4 in the first 18 months of my daughter

Now I mostly use Sigma 30 f/1.4 without flash.

Definitely flash ... it was still hard shooting even with a fast lens when my son was a little baby as well ... a flash that is capable of bounce/swivel really can make those images pop (without startling them as well).

I could even make my kit lens images look really good as well. But when mated to a decent prime ... my shots relly shone.

Use your current lenses and get a flashgun for sure.

dinneenp · 10-23-2010, 10:41 PM

I have a 50mm f1.7.
Thinking of selling it and buying a 17-50mm f2.8 and a flash. Would they be a good substitute for the prime lens for indoor/low light shots of kids? Can the flash work on auto or do I have to set stuff on it, thus ending up missing shots?
Cheers,
Pa

LucyGoosey · 11-10-2010, 01:07 PM

Really glad I found this thread! I too have the k2000 and 40mm and was worrying that it might be a little long and/or slow for baby pics. I was considering getting the new 35mm/f2.4 lens for a little bit faster glass and shorter focal length. But that would be using up on $200 that would have been spent on a new stroller/play pen/etc! Anyone else have the 35mm for this purpose? Is it much of an upgrade/downgrade from the 40mm?

paperbag846 · 11-10-2010, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by LucyGoosey

Is it much of an upgrade/downgrade from the 40mm?

I don't see much point in the 35 when you have a 40, if the 40 is too long I would imagine you would feel the same way about the 35. I would go sub-28mm for a nice complementary focal length to the 40. (28mm = 42 mm on film, which is slightly wide of normal, and gives you some breathing room).

Is the kit lens not cutting it for you?

jimH · 11-10-2010, 05:50 PM

I wouldn't spend any more money on lenses if you have the kit lens (18-55). A flash that you could bounce off the ceiling would be more practical and give you all the light needed for a well exposed picture of your 'youngun', I use and like the (Pentax AF540FGZ with a Sto-fen diffuser). In my mind, the diffuser is a must for indoor flash photography. (I'm not selling Sto-fen diffusers, I'm just a satisfied users of one.)

One thing that I like about the kit lens, 18-55 is the variable focal length with which to work. The external flash would give you the extra light that you might need to make up for the somewhat slower kit lens, but a flash is something that you could use on into the future, especially when you could justify a faster more versatile lens.

10-22-2010, 07:24 AM	#40
whojammyflip Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 417	Cracking last photo there of your nipper. No one has mentioned it, but you could try picking up an old film body and pushing black and white TRI-X to 1600. In combination with a M50/1.7 on a ME Super, I am getting some nice shots. The split screen is great for focussing manually. This is roughly equivalent to your DA 40 on DSLR, I reckon. Full frame (ie 35mm film) offers even less depth of field though for the same field of view, due to using longer focal lengths. I've got a load of lenses, and the 50mm is the one I end up using, or the macro 50mm for very close-up photos. Actually, I've got some lovely pics of hands and feet using the M50/4: a macro could be a good one to look out for. One of the problems with the film approach is the time it takes...something of a rare commodity after having a new baby. If you have the cash, it may be worth looking into the faster lenses (like FA Ltds) for dreamy depth of field effects, which are more appropriate when trying to do things like isolate the eyes. I'd do this, but I currently have 3 SLR bodies, several lenses, a ist DS, a darkroom, etc spilling over. Difficult to justify further expense. The main thing is to make sure you take photos. I just picked up a little Nikon s220 for the wife. Funny thing is, I end up using that too, even though the IQ stinks in comparison to my Pentax stuff, as its always there. Certainly though, these mini digital cameras are really only good for cr@ppy photos for sharing on the interweb. Last edited by whojammyflip; 10-22-2010 at 07:31 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Travel My Baby	ASammet	Post Your Photos!	6	12-23-2010 01:35 AM
Baby shoot	Ash	Post Your Photos!	25	08-20-2009 02:53 PM
Baby photos from the Baby Vogue event	codiac2600	Post Your Photos!	13	02-03-2009 05:26 PM
First Model Shoot/Last Shoot w/ K10D	quickpix	Photo Critique	2	01-13-2009 07:41 AM
Baby Christmas Shoot! C&C Please!	Sarahbell	Post Your Photos!	4	12-23-2007 11:38 PM

10-15-2010, 07:52 AM	#31
jimH Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: South Central Nebraska - USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,771	Originally posted by taurus9 I will also vouch for the previous posters' suggestion on getting an external flash that can swivel and allow bounce flash. In addition, a flash diffuser is an essential addition to your flash. It greatly improves the light distribution and kills the harshness of a naked flash. I use a Sto-Fen diffuser with my Pentax AF-540FGZ flash and I am very happy with the results that I obtain with it.

10-15-2010, 11:56 AM	#32
Ikarus Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 484	I agree that a flash will be good to have once they start running around, but for the OP, my advice is to defer that decision until he actually has to deal with it and to focus on what he needs now. Personally, I would be less concerned about the flash doing physical harm to a baby's eyes, but with the fact that it tends to startle them and interferes with my approach of doing lots of shots in a row without disturbing the intimacy of the moment. Of course, it would be even better if the shutter of the K-x weren't so damn loud. ;-) Another one with the Super-Takumar 50/1.4:

10-15-2010, 12:16 PM	#33
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Hello_Photo With respect to a flash "hurting" a child's eyes, I'm pretty sure that's bunk. I'm not a doctor, but I've been blazing away at my 1 and 3 year-olds with a flash since they were born (primarily with indirect/bounce flash), and they haven't displayed any ill-effects. Naturally, you need to be comfortable with your own decision on this. as long as it's not direct, it wouldn't hurt.

10-15-2010, 12:38 PM	#34
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	I don't feel the need for the OP to have a good flash for now. I mean, it's a baby. the OP can always buy the flash at a later time when the baby can virtually run around, which would be in a few years. the OP can instead use the built-in flash of the k-m and buy a puffer or a lightscoop to spread out the light more evenly or balanced. for babies, a 1/180 shutterspeed flash exposure would be enough to give you the much needed freezing motion. buy an external flash only when the right time comes. as far as lens suggestion is concerned, the DA40 is enough and there's no need for another one. just save the money to purchase or fund something else. as far as a P&S camera is concerned, if the M4/3 cameras are not that big for the OP, I would recommend him/her either an Oly Epl-1 with the lens or Panasonic G2. if he/she wants to push it to further to excellent HD video capability, the GH1 would be the perfect fit in terms of video performance and price budget (if you are able to find a copy for $500-$600 for the body only).

10-15-2010, 01:25 PM	#35
dreamfall New Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: orlando Posts: 22 Original Poster	Thank you all! I appreciate every reply. I bought my DA40 less than a year and like it very much, but if I knew I would have a baby so early I would have got FA 50/1.4 instead. I had always been longing for a better compact camera, so I will get one with HD first. (Great now I have a reason!) Currently I like canon S95, simply because it's small size and have a HD, but I'll wait till its price is more reasonable. As most of you have suggested, my km+DA40 may work fine after the baby is born at first. From now on, I will also keep an eye on a flash, which I always want because I like shoot food. Thanks! Alice

10-15-2010, 04:46 PM	#36
CEWren Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 258	Originally posted by Pablom Don't shoot your baby! I know they can be a pain sometimes but you better deal with it or give him away to someone who wants him as a last resort glad I wasnt the only one who found a bit of humor in the wording! shooting babies is wrong!! - I think a nice p & s would be nice, but dunno how you could go back to a p & s once having a dslr??? I have a toddler and i take my bulky pentax with us everywhere..

10-15-2010, 08:58 PM	#37
littledrawe Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Red Rock Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,514	First off you have a great set up! I have the same equipment, I was surprised to see someone else with it because the K2000 doesnt seem too popular but that is beside the point. I have this flash Camera Flashes and it suits me just fine, a third of the price of the pentax brand with the same adjustability. The DA L 40 mm is great, don't jump ship for the 50 mm like everyone else seems to be telling you just yet. Check out the thread for the DA Limited club here https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74194-da-limited-club.html not all the images are from the 40 mm but there are several that are labeled as such and that lens does some amazing things. I posted some of my friends 6 month old toward the end of the thread that I took with my 40 mm. My wife is just about to have our first next month and I plan to do my first shoot of him with my 40 mm. Good luck. K2000 users need to speak up more

10-16-2010, 12:20 AM	#38
akanarya Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Çankırı, Turkey Posts: 210	Originally posted by littledrawe First off you have a great set up! I have the same equipment, I was surprised to see someone else with it because the K2000 doesnt seem too popular but that is beside the point. I have this flash Camera Flashes and it suits me just fine, a third of the price of the pentax brand with the same adjustability. The DA L 40 mm is great, don't jump ship for the 50 mm like everyone else seems to be telling you just yet. Check out the thread for the DA Limited club here https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74194-da-limited-club.html not all the images are from the 40 mm but there are several that are labeled as such and that lens does some amazing things. I posted some of my friends 6 month old toward the end of the thread that I took with my 40 mm. My wife is just about to have our first next month and I plan to do my first shoot of him with my 40 mm. Good luck. K2000 users need to speak up more you will need when it starts to move. congrats.

10-23-2010, 09:19 AM	#41
Mechan1k Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 2,891	Originally posted by simico Pick up a P-TTL flash with swivel head (e.g. Metz 48) for indirect bounced flash. It helps a lot when there's not enough light. DA40 should be sufficient in all cases with bounced flash, I used the kit lens and DA17-70 f/4 in the first 18 months of my daughter Now I mostly use Sigma 30 f/1.4 without flash. Definitely flash ... it was still hard shooting even with a fast lens when my son was a little baby as well ... a flash that is capable of bounce/swivel really can make those images pop (without startling them as well). I could even make my kit lens images look really good as well. But when mated to a decent prime ... my shots relly shone. Use your current lenses and get a flashgun for sure.

10-23-2010, 10:41 PM	#42
dinneenp Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: ireland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 166	I have a 50mm f1.7. Thinking of selling it and buying a 17-50mm f2.8 and a flash. Would they be a good substitute for the prime lens for indoor/low light shots of kids? Can the flash work on auto or do I have to set stuff on it, thus ending up missing shots? Cheers, Pa

11-10-2010, 01:07 PM	#43
LucyGoosey Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: New Jersey Photos: Albums Posts: 86	Really glad I found this thread! I too have the k2000 and 40mm and was worrying that it might be a little long and/or slow for baby pics. I was considering getting the new 35mm/f2.4 lens for a little bit faster glass and shorter focal length. But that would be using up on $200 that would have been spent on a new stroller/play pen/etc! Anyone else have the 35mm for this purpose? Is it much of an upgrade/downgrade from the 40mm?

11-10-2010, 04:03 PM	#44
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by LucyGoosey Is it much of an upgrade/downgrade from the 40mm? I don't see much point in the 35 when you have a 40, if the 40 is too long I would imagine you would feel the same way about the 35. I would go sub-28mm for a nice complementary focal length to the 40. (28mm = 42 mm on film, which is slightly wide of normal, and gives you some breathing room). Is the kit lens not cutting it for you?

11-10-2010, 05:50 PM	#45
jimH Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: South Central Nebraska - USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,771	I wouldn't spend any more money on lenses if you have the kit lens (18-55). A flash that you could bounce off the ceiling would be more practical and give you all the light needed for a well exposed picture of your 'youngun', I use and like the (Pentax AF540FGZ with a Sto-fen diffuser). In my mind, the diffuser is a must for indoor flash photography. (I'm not selling Sto-fen diffusers, I'm just a satisfied users of one.) One thing that I like about the kit lens, 18-55 is the variable focal length with which to work. The external flash would give you the extra light that you might need to make up for the somewhat slower kit lens, but a flash is something that you could use on into the future, especially when you could justify a faster more versatile lens.