Best lens/combo for shooting babies?

beaumont · 01-01-2012, 12:18 PM

Here's one I took over Christmas of my cousin and her grandson. (With the 31 Ltd. Love the focal length and that I can often get by without a flash.)

Attached Images

DaveHolmes · 01-02-2012, 04:58 AM

Originally posted by dmort

I have the 18-135 as well and I find I use it all the time for taking pictures of my son. The shots below are both the 18-135. Maybe an external flash could serve as well? Although, I'd never try to dissuade someone from buying more lenses! And I really do love the 43mm!

I think these are great!
The IQ of the 18-135 seems to far outshine that of the 18-55-kit... If I manage to ever upgrade to the K5, it'll be with the 18-135-kit rather than body only...

(edit) With regards to external flash... I think working with flash 'can' generate grate results and I use mine often...
I have however read that using flash on new-borns can damage their eyes so I aviod it til they can sit up un-aided/crawl...

Ikarus · 01-02-2012, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by DaveHolmes

The IQ of the 18-135 seems to far outshine that of the 18-55-kit

I don't believe this to be a general pattern. Bad copy, perhaps? I've found the kit to be a capable lens. It's just too slow for getting much out of it indoors without flash, which means that it's not a very good "baby lens", but neither is the 18-135. This is with the 18-55 AL II on a K-x:

Cacti by Ludger Solbach, on 500px

dmort · 01-02-2012, 07:13 PM

I bought my pentax gear before I was a part of this forum or really knew much about pentax aside from the great reviews on the K5. I went with the 18-135 as my first lens because it just seemed sensible! Very usable range, weather sealing, a step up from the kit... Then I read all these negative reviews and got down on myself. Then I remembered that cameras and lenses are about photography! I've been very happy with my 18-135. It does a good job, its reliable, and its quirks are all correctable. And I've found it to be a great tool to record my son. I can take it to the pool without worrying about splashing, hikes, bath time, what have you... That kid isnt' going to stay tiny and immobile after all.

One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8.

Ikarus · 01-02-2012, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by dmort

One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8.

I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here.

Sliver-Surfer · 01-02-2012, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by Ikarus

I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here.

I agree The SMC Takumar 50mm/1.4 is fantastic it's got a great sharp DOF and swaddles the babies in a nice warm Bokeh.

qtopplings · 01-02-2012, 10:01 PM - **1 Like**

I think the FA 50 1.4 is great (and cheap)

I also use the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 50-150 for portraits. The Sigma is better for outdoors when you can get a bit farther away. The only thing I wish is these lenses had better close focus. I find I like to get really close sometimes, and the pictures are not in good focus at close range. Maybe the Tamron 90mm Macro would be a good lens for this?

FA50

Sigma 50-150

Tammy 17-50

pinholecam · 01-02-2012, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by qtopplings

I think the FA 50 1.4 is great (and cheap)

I also use the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 50-150 for portraits. The Sigma is better for outdoors when you can get a bit farther away. The only thing I wish is these lenses had better close focus. I find I like to get really close sometimes, and the pictures are not in good focus at close range. Maybe the Tamron 90mm Macro would be a good lens for this?

Just love that look of glee in his eye.
Wonderful

frank · 01-03-2012, 03:22 AM

DA35/2.4 or FA31/1.8 is all you need to shoot newborn babies. When they grow up a bit and start to walk around, can add a longer lenses like FA50/77 when going outdoor. Don't really need a zoom lens from my experience.

mKlus · 01-03-2012, 03:44 AM

The second one is great and funny

It's amazing how clean it is for ISO3200, I wish I could get used K-5 somewhere for $500

For now I'll be enjoying my K-7. DA 18-135mm is great lens!

Originally posted by dmort

I have the 18-135 as well and I find I use it all the time for taking pictures of my son. The shots below are both the 18-135. Maybe an external flash could serve as well? Although, I'd never try to dissuade someone from buying more lenses! And I really do love the 43mm!

mKlus · 01-03-2012, 03:47 AM

And because of you guys I've started looking for Pentax M 50mm F1.4 or F1.7. If I find one reasonably priced I'll get one.

Originally posted by dmort

I bought my pentax gear before I was a part of this forum or really knew much about pentax aside from the great reviews on the K5. I went with the 18-135 as my first lens because it just seemed sensible! Very usable range, weather sealing, a step up from the kit... Then I read all these negative reviews and got down on myself. Then I remembered that cameras and lenses are about photography! I've been very happy with my 18-135. It does a good job, its reliable, and its quirks are all correctable. And I've found it to be a great tool to record my son. I can take it to the pool without worrying about splashing, hikes, bath time, what have you... That kid isnt' going to stay tiny and immobile after all.

One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8.

Originally posted by Ikarus

I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here.

Originally posted by Sliver-Surfer

I agree The SMC Takumar 50mm/1.4 is fantastic it's got a great sharp DOF and swaddles the babies in a nice warm Bokeh.

mKlus · 01-03-2012, 03:48 AM

I have to agree!

Wonderful

Originally posted by pinholecam

Just love that look of glee in his eye.
Wonderful

BeerBelly · 01-03-2012, 04:40 AM

I use my FA50 1.4 most of the times when shooting my newborn daughter. The below pic is the FA 50 at f2 I think.

stanislav · 01-03-2012, 06:19 AM

All your combos are great. Althou I don't have any of limiteds, I do have FA 50 f1.4, Porst 55 f1.2 and M 35 f2 to mention some. However most of my photos are taken with Tamron 28-75 f2.8 even thou I always carry my FA50 1.4 in the bag. Versatility of decently fast and sharp zoom just outwaights sharpness of the primes in most cases, especially since the kids tent do grow up and move much more, so if you want to capture some "action" a zoom is a welcome tool (unless you make heavy postprocessing with cropping and so).

Here is an indoor example with Tamron 28-75 f2.8 on K-7 (ISO 800, focal length 50mm, f2.8 1/45 s, auto white balance with light coming from those energy saving bulbs) with no postprocessing.

rjcassara · 01-03-2012, 11:15 AM

A good zoom lens is nice to have when you have an ambulatory child outdoors. You might do well with the 18-135 and 55-300 combo.

For indoors shots, I used the FA50 1.4 a lot, but it always felt a bit too tight (doesn't help that I have a really small house).
I just recently got the 43 ltd, and have been loving it so far. I don't miss the half-stop of aperture, since I generally shot the 50 at f2.0 and up to improve sharpness.

I seriously looked at the 35 ltd macro, but read that the autofocus can be really slow because of the huge focus range. I wasn't certain my wife and I were up to the challenge of trying to use a slower AF with a 2 year old.

01-02-2012, 04:58 AM	#62
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	Originally posted by dmort I have the 18-135 as well and I find I use it all the time for taking pictures of my son. The shots below are both the 18-135. Maybe an external flash could serve as well? Although, I'd never try to dissuade someone from buying more lenses! And I really do love the 43mm! I think these are great! The IQ of the 18-135 seems to far outshine that of the 18-55-kit... If I manage to ever upgrade to the K5, it'll be with the 18-135-kit rather than body only... (edit) With regards to external flash... I think working with flash 'can' generate grate results and I use mine often... I have however read that using flash on new-borns can damage their eyes so I aviod it til they can sit up un-aided/crawl... Last edited by DaveHolmes; 01-02-2012 at 05:01 AM. Reason: info

01-02-2012, 11:20 AM	#63
Ikarus Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 484	Originally posted by DaveHolmes The IQ of the 18-135 seems to far outshine that of the 18-55-kit I don't believe this to be a general pattern. Bad copy, perhaps? I've found the kit to be a capable lens. It's just too slow for getting much out of it indoors without flash, which means that it's not a very good "baby lens", but neither is the 18-135. This is with the 18-55 AL II on a K-x: Cacti by Ludger Solbach, on 500px Last edited by Ikarus; 01-02-2012 at 11:56 AM.

01-03-2012, 06:19 AM	#74
stanislav Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Stockholm Photos: Albums Posts: 125	Sharpness and fastnes of primes vs. versatility of zooms All your combos are great. Althou I don't have any of limiteds, I do have FA 50 f1.4, Porst 55 f1.2 and M 35 f2 to mention some. However most of my photos are taken with Tamron 28-75 f2.8 even thou I always carry my FA50 1.4 in the bag. Versatility of decently fast and sharp zoom just outwaights sharpness of the primes in most cases, especially since the kids tent do grow up and move much more, so if you want to capture some "action" a zoom is a welcome tool (unless you make heavy postprocessing with cropping and so). Here is an indoor example with Tamron 28-75 f2.8 on K-7 (ISO 800, focal length 50mm, f2.8 1/45 s, auto white balance with light coming from those energy saving bulbs) with no postprocessing.

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

01-01-2012, 12:18 PM	#61
beaumont Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 505	Here's one I took over Christmas of my cousin and her grandson. (With the 31 Ltd. Love the focal length and that I can often get by without a flash.) Attached Images

01-02-2012, 07:13 PM	#64
dmort Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Bronx, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 415	I bought my pentax gear before I was a part of this forum or really knew much about pentax aside from the great reviews on the K5. I went with the 18-135 as my first lens because it just seemed sensible! Very usable range, weather sealing, a step up from the kit... Then I read all these negative reviews and got down on myself. Then I remembered that cameras and lenses are about photography! I've been very happy with my 18-135. It does a good job, its reliable, and its quirks are all correctable. And I've found it to be a great tool to record my son. I can take it to the pool without worrying about splashing, hikes, bath time, what have you... That kid isnt' going to stay tiny and immobile after all. One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8.

01-02-2012, 07:25 PM	#65
Ikarus Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 484	Originally posted by dmort One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8. I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here.

01-02-2012, 08:03 PM	#66
Sliver-Surfer Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,558	Originally posted by Ikarus I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here. I agree The SMC Takumar 50mm/1.4 is fantastic it's got a great sharp DOF and swaddles the babies in a nice warm Bokeh.

01-02-2012, 10:01 PM - 1 Like	#67
qtopplings Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Marin, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 282	I think the FA 50 1.4 is great (and cheap) I also use the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 50-150 for portraits. The Sigma is better for outdoors when you can get a bit farther away. The only thing I wish is these lenses had better close focus. I find I like to get really close sometimes, and the pictures are not in good focus at close range. Maybe the Tamron 90mm Macro would be a good lens for this? FA50 Sigma 50-150 Tammy 17-50

01-02-2012, 11:42 PM	#68
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by qtopplings I think the FA 50 1.4 is great (and cheap) I also use the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 50-150 for portraits. The Sigma is better for outdoors when you can get a bit farther away. The only thing I wish is these lenses had better close focus. I find I like to get really close sometimes, and the pictures are not in good focus at close range. Maybe the Tamron 90mm Macro would be a good lens for this? Just love that look of glee in his eye. Wonderful

01-03-2012, 03:22 AM	#69
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	DA35/2.4 or FA31/1.8 is all you need to shoot newborn babies. When they grow up a bit and start to walk around, can add a longer lenses like FA50/77 when going outdoor. Don't really need a zoom lens from my experience.

01-03-2012, 03:44 AM	#70
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	The second one is great and funny It's amazing how clean it is for ISO3200, I wish I could get used K-5 somewhere for $500 For now I'll be enjoying my K-7. DA 18-135mm is great lens! Originally posted by dmort I have the 18-135 as well and I find I use it all the time for taking pictures of my son. The shots below are both the 18-135. Maybe an external flash could serve as well? Although, I'd never try to dissuade someone from buying more lenses! And I really do love the 43mm!

01-03-2012, 03:47 AM	#71
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	And because of you guys I've started looking for Pentax M 50mm F1.4 or F1.7. If I find one reasonably priced I'll get one. Originally posted by dmort I bought my pentax gear before I was a part of this forum or really knew much about pentax aside from the great reviews on the K5. I went with the 18-135 as my first lens because it just seemed sensible! Very usable range, weather sealing, a step up from the kit... Then I read all these negative reviews and got down on myself. Then I remembered that cameras and lenses are about photography! I've been very happy with my 18-135. It does a good job, its reliable, and its quirks are all correctable. And I've found it to be a great tool to record my son. I can take it to the pool without worrying about splashing, hikes, bath time, what have you... That kid isnt' going to stay tiny and immobile after all. One other mention, there is a person in the Single in January challenge who just had a child, you might want to look at those threads as well to see some great examples of baby photography. She's shooting with the SMC Takumar 55mm F/1.8. Originally posted by Ikarus I second this recommendation. That lens and the Super-Takumar 50/1.4 are the ones that got by far the most use for my own attempts at indoors low-light baby photography, which is why I recommended them here. Originally posted by Sliver-Surfer I agree The SMC Takumar 50mm/1.4 is fantastic it's got a great sharp DOF and swaddles the babies in a nice warm Bokeh.

01-03-2012, 03:48 AM	#72
mKlus Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery Posts: 54 Original Poster	I have to agree! Wonderful Originally posted by pinholecam Just love that look of glee in his eye. Wonderful

01-03-2012, 04:40 AM	#73
BeerBelly Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 139	I use my FA50 1.4 most of the times when shooting my newborn daughter. The below pic is the FA 50 at f2 I think.

01-03-2012, 11:15 AM	#75
rjcassara Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 37	A good zoom lens is nice to have when you have an ambulatory child outdoors. You might do well with the 18-135 and 55-300 combo. For indoors shots, I used the FA50 1.4 a lot, but it always felt a bit too tight (doesn't help that I have a really small house). I just recently got the 43 ltd, and have been loving it so far. I don't miss the half-stop of aperture, since I generally shot the 50 at f2.0 and up to improve sharpness. I seriously looked at the 35 ltd macro, but read that the autofocus can be really slow because of the huge focus range. I wasn't certain my wife and I were up to the challenge of trying to use a slower AF with a 2 year old.