Best lens/combo for shooting babies?

mKlus · 12-30-2011, 07:17 PM

Thanks for the photos dmort. The FA 43mm is right now on the top of my list

Originally posted by dmort

Howdy, I have a similar kit and I also have an 11 month old who's life has been largely documented with my K5. I have really enjoyed taking pictures of my son with my 43mm. You get great out of focus effects with f1.9 plus the corresponding low light performance. I just reviewed all my photos from this year with that lens and realized how many of my favorites were taken with the 43mm. Here are a few samples.

mKlus · 12-30-2011, 07:19 PM

Thanks Ikarus. I might look into those 2 lenses but I still prefer to have the autofocus.

Originally posted by Ikarus

With babies, you don't really need auto-focus, nor a zoom lens. I've taken most of my baby shots on my Pentax K-x at 3200 ISO max with a Super-Takumar, either the 50/1.4 or the 55/1.8, which cost me less than 100$ combined.

mKlus · 12-30-2011, 07:22 PM

Isn't the DA 70mm to long for indoor shots? Will 31, 35, 40 or 43mm be better choice here?

Originally posted by psychdoc

The DA 70mm wont let you down. [1st photo]
On the other hand, the Tamron 28-75 is more versatile, so I use it more. [2nd photo]. If you have a $1000 to spend. Why not get both?

mKlus · 12-30-2011, 07:23 PM

thanks robgo2.

Originally posted by robgo2

I have an 11 month old grandchild. The FA43 is my favorite lens for taking pics of her. I own the other two FA Limiteds and the DA*16-50 as well, but the FA 43 is the best of the bunch, IMO, and not just for baby pictures.

Rob

mKlus · 12-30-2011, 07:27 PM

TOUGEFC, I was browsing your flickr albums and I love the pictures

If you could choose just one form the FA 43mm, DA* 55mm and FA 77mm, which one would you choose?

Cheers,
Marek

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

The DA*55 and FA77 are the portrait king lenses under $1000.

psychdoc · 12-30-2011, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by mKlus

Isn't the DA 70mm to long for indoor shots? Will 31, 35, 40 or 43mm be better choice here?

If you were looking for a one-lens solution, then yes. But for your budget, you could get one prime and one zoom. Which is why the tamron 28-75 is quite versatile addition, that you could add to a prime lens of your chosen focal length.

Personally, about 90% of my photography, [not a professional] is people photography. I wound up with the pentax 50-135 also. Best of the lot but big and more of outdoor or stage lens.

Ikarus · 12-30-2011, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by mKlus

Thanks Ikarus. I might look into those 2 lenses but I still prefer to have the autofocus.

For indoors baby pictures in poorly lit rooms, I wanted the fastest possible lens at a reasonable price point, and this made the Tak 50/1.4 impossible to beat. Of course, f/1.2 would be even better, but the return on investment seemed a bit disproportionate. It does take practice to focus manually, but newborns make for the perfect training subject, since they don't move much.

Last edited by Ikarus; 12-30-2011 at 07:57 PM.

TOUGEFC · 12-30-2011, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by mKlus

TOUGEFC, I was browsing your flickr albums and I love the pictures

If you could choose just one form the FA 43mm, DA* 55mm and FA 77mm, which one would you choose?

Cheers,
Marek

Thanks!

Thats a hard question for me to answer, I love the FA77 and DA*55, it would be one of those.
The FA43 is good but the 55 and 77 are much better.

dmort · 12-30-2011, 08:44 PM

I found that it took me a little bit to get used to the 43mm... I think the things that make it special, also make it hard to use. For example, I find that I have a little trouble getting it to focus exactly. But when I get it where I want, the results are great. I love the 3d look I get out the lens. However, sometimes I find it is a little close. I don't think that baby photography and portraiture are exactly the same thing. For example, I live in an apt, and in our bathroom, 43mm is pretty close for the dimensions of the room. But, its a great lens and you have lots of wiggle room with aperture. You can go to 2.8 and still have good low light performance, but retain the option of shallow depth of field at 1.9. Probably the 31mm is also a great choice, but it is pricey. I got my 43mm used from adorama.

TOUGEFC · 12-30-2011, 09:01 PM

Once you start stopping down the 43 the bokeh highlights become very ugly very fast due to its 8 bladed iris.

Since I got the DA*55, I rarely touch the FA43, it only gets used for landscapes these days.
Dont get me wrong the FA43 is still a FANTASTIC lens!

The FA43 is more of an "all-rounder" lens, while the DA*55 and FA77 do better in portraits.

dmort · 12-30-2011, 09:06 PM

Argh. I want a 55mm. /sigh

**miltona580** · 12-30-2011, 09:32 PM

You could get a Pentax K 55mm lens. I got a f/1.8 for $80. Supposedly the f/2 one is good too - same optical formula?

Here's the promised pictures with the 31 Limited. Excuse the yellow tint. The little guy is slightly jaundiced!

Sagitta · 12-30-2011, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by miltona580

You could get a Pentax K 55mm lens. I got a f/1.8 for $80. Supposedly the f/2 one is good too - same optical formula?

Heck, if you're going budget, I have shots of my son I took with an old Sears 50mm f/1.7 I paid $16 for.

Bestzoom · 12-31-2011, 04:23 AM

The Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a hulk of a lens.

It is a fantastic portrait lens and very 'sharp' wide opened- possibly as good as the Zeiss.

All the Best!

Chex · 12-31-2011, 04:45 AM

If most of your shooting is going to be indoors, I would recommend the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or the 43 Ltd.. if your wanting something longer, I'd have to agree with Simon and say the DA*55 or 77Ltd.

12-30-2011, 08:00 PM	#38
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by mKlus TOUGEFC, I was browsing your flickr albums and I love the pictures If you could choose just one form the FA 43mm, DA* 55mm and FA 77mm, which one would you choose? Cheers, Marek Thanks! Thats a hard question for me to answer, I love the FA77 and DA55, it would be one of those. The FA43 is good but the 55 and 77 are much better. Last edited by TOUGEFC; 12-30-2011 at 08:08 PM.*

12-30-2011, 09:01 PM	#40
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Once you start stopping down the 43 the bokeh highlights become very ugly very fast due to its 8 bladed iris. Since I got the DA55, I rarely touch the FA43, it only gets used for landscapes these days. Dont get me wrong the FA43 is still a FANTASTIC lens! The FA43 is more of an "all-rounder" lens, while the DA55 and FA77 do better in portraits. Last edited by TOUGEFC; 12-30-2011 at 09:26 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Your favorite Camera/Lens Combo??	outsider	Photographic Industry and Professionals	19	12-11-2011 09:48 AM
3 lens combo poll	vrrattko	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	07-14-2011 02:07 PM
What camera/lens combo is this ?	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	06-15-2011 11:56 PM
Whats your favorite camera/lens combo?	yeatzee	Photographic Technique	31	09-29-2010 12:36 PM
Pentx K7 with F 50mm 1.7 lens good combo?	mba1971	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	06-26-2010 11:51 AM

12-30-2011, 07:17 PM	#31
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	Thanks for the photos dmort. The FA 43mm is right now on the top of my list Originally posted by dmort Howdy, I have a similar kit and I also have an 11 month old who's life has been largely documented with my K5. I have really enjoyed taking pictures of my son with my 43mm. You get great out of focus effects with f1.9 plus the corresponding low light performance. I just reviewed all my photos from this year with that lens and realized how many of my favorites were taken with the 43mm. Here are a few samples.

12-30-2011, 07:19 PM	#32
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	Thanks Ikarus. I might look into those 2 lenses but I still prefer to have the autofocus. Originally posted by Ikarus With babies, you don't really need auto-focus, nor a zoom lens. I've taken most of my baby shots on my Pentax K-x at 3200 ISO max with a Super-Takumar, either the 50/1.4 or the 55/1.8, which cost me less than 100$ combined.

12-30-2011, 07:22 PM	#33
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	Isn't the DA 70mm to long for indoor shots? Will 31, 35, 40 or 43mm be better choice here? Originally posted by psychdoc The DA 70mm wont let you down. [1st photo] On the other hand, the Tamron 28-75 is more versatile, so I use it more. [2nd photo]. If you have a $1000 to spend. Why not get both?

12-30-2011, 07:23 PM	#34
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	thanks robgo2. Originally posted by robgo2 I have an 11 month old grandchild. The FA43 is my favorite lens for taking pics of her. I own the other two FA Limiteds and the DA*16-50 as well, but the FA 43 is the best of the bunch, IMO, and not just for baby pictures. Rob

12-30-2011, 07:27 PM	#35
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	TOUGEFC, I was browsing your flickr albums and I love the pictures If you could choose just one form the FA 43mm, DA* 55mm and FA 77mm, which one would you choose? Cheers, Marek Originally posted by TOUGEFC The DA*55 and FA77 are the portrait king lenses under $1000.

12-30-2011, 07:32 PM	#36
psychdoc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Bham Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 949	Originally posted by mKlus Isn't the DA 70mm to long for indoor shots? Will 31, 35, 40 or 43mm be better choice here? If you were looking for a one-lens solution, then yes. But for your budget, you could get one prime and one zoom. Which is why the tamron 28-75 is quite versatile addition, that you could add to a prime lens of your chosen focal length. Personally, about 90% of my photography, [not a professional] is people photography. I wound up with the pentax 50-135 also. Best of the lot but big and more of outdoor or stage lens.

12-30-2011, 07:50 PM	#37
Ikarus Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 484	Originally posted by mKlus Thanks Ikarus. I might look into those 2 lenses but I still prefer to have the autofocus. For indoors baby pictures in poorly lit rooms, I wanted the fastest possible lens at a reasonable price point, and this made the Tak 50/1.4 impossible to beat. Of course, f/1.2 would be even better, but the return on investment seemed a bit disproportionate. It does take practice to focus manually, but newborns make for the perfect training subject, since they don't move much. Last edited by Ikarus; 12-30-2011 at 07:57 PM.

12-30-2011, 08:44 PM	#39
dmort Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Bronx, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 415	I found that it took me a little bit to get used to the 43mm... I think the things that make it special, also make it hard to use. For example, I find that I have a little trouble getting it to focus exactly. But when I get it where I want, the results are great. I love the 3d look I get out the lens. However, sometimes I find it is a little close. I don't think that baby photography and portraiture are exactly the same thing. For example, I live in an apt, and in our bathroom, 43mm is pretty close for the dimensions of the room. But, its a great lens and you have lots of wiggle room with aperture. You can go to 2.8 and still have good low light performance, but retain the option of shallow depth of field at 1.9. Probably the 31mm is also a great choice, but it is pricey. I got my 43mm used from adorama.

12-30-2011, 09:06 PM	#41
dmort Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Bronx, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 415	Argh. I want a 55mm. /sigh

12-30-2011, 10:39 PM	#43
Sagitta Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,081	Originally posted by miltona580 You could get a Pentax K 55mm lens. I got a f/1.8 for $80. Supposedly the f/2 one is good too - same optical formula? Heck, if you're going budget, I have shots of my son I took with an old Sears 50mm f/1.7 I paid $16 for.

12-31-2011, 04:23 AM	#44
Bestzoom Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 232	The Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a hulk of a lens. It is a fantastic portrait lens and very 'sharp' wide opened- possibly as good as the Zeiss. All the Best!

12-31-2011, 04:45 AM	#45
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	If most of your shooting is going to be indoors, I would recommend the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or the 43 Ltd.. if your wanting something longer, I'd have to agree with Simon and say the DA*55 or 77Ltd.