Portrait Lens for Children

jaywes · 10-04-2013, 10:17 AM

I'd have to agree. Utilizing a prime with a toddler is extremely difficult and constricting to say the least. My son is 14.5 months and he is all over. I got more useable shots when he was younger and less mobile.

I would second a zoom. I have a M-50 1.4 & A-50 1.2 as well as M-28 2.8 & Gem M-135 2.8 which I use far less if at all for my son. My tamron 17-50 f2.8 lives on my k-r/k-5. I have lots that I have not gotten a chance to upload (the 5% keepers). You can see a handful here: Baby Noah - a set on Flickr

callmescipio · 10-07-2013, 06:50 PM

My local kijiji has an ad for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 (a year old) for $280 (CDN). Worth jumping on? (I still think I want an autofocus prime, but agree that an upgrade from the kit zoom lens would also be very very useful.)

Is there a big difference between Tamron and Sigma lenses? (Sorry, I'm really new to the whole 'move past the kit lens' thing.)

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-07-2013, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by callmescipio

My local kijiji has an ad for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 (a year old) for $280 (CDN). Worth jumping on? (I still think I want an autofocus prime, but agree that an upgrade from the kit zoom lens would also be very very useful.)

It's useful for times when you know you want to take shots, but don't know if the prime will be right for those shots. The wide aperture (for a zoom) adds some other options that the 18-55 won't do. It will work well with a flash too, using the wide aperture to let in more ambient light and allowing the flash to fire at a lower power setting.

Morro · 10-31-2013, 03:05 PM

As a father of 8 month old and a K100D owner I think something like Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL or Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-4.5 would be very good and affordable.

I have Pentax 50mm 1.4, and while I love the photos, the 50mm on 1.5 crop factor make me step back pretty far. A lot of Kodak moments go untaken. I think something in 28-35mm range would be more useful. I also don't like to haul heavy lens as the camera with AA batteries is pretty heavy.

BigAshDog · 11-03-2013, 09:30 AM

I have zero information for you but, as a newbie with squiggly children, wanted to thank you for asking this question.

narual · 11-05-2013, 10:29 PM

I'll second the 28-75 tamron. I picked a used one up cheap recently and got a chance to actually use it for the first time this last weekend - a small number of sample shots here: Flickr

Ben78 · 11-06-2013, 03:20 AM

FA50/1.4 has been the run-to for me through the lives of my now 6 1/2 and 4 1/2 year olds. I like the slightly longer aspect the 50 gives over (say) 28 and 35mm focal length as you can keep back from the action and avoid the 'typical' ruining the moment by being a focal point of the kids. Even longer has had a decent run on my kids over the years, something about being able to capture them without having any idea you are watching...

Attachment 193971
Sigma APO 400/5.6

Attachment 193972
Makinon 135/2.8 (edit, I don't know what lens this is - exif says 135mm @f7.1 but the Makinon is the only 135mm lens I have owned, but it was only K mount not KA. I have never owned a zoom in this range that would transmit the focal length..... So I dunno! Either way its good and sharp and he was jumping on a trampoline)

Attachment 193973
Pentax FA100/2.8

Attachment 193974
Sigma APO 400/5.6

Pentax FA50/1.4

Anyway just trying to say you don't need to be right up in the lil ratbags faces to get a good shot of them doing their kid thing.

Last edited by Ben78; 10-18-2014 at 06:44 PM.

narual · 11-06-2013, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by Ben78

Anyway just trying to say you don't need to be right up in the lil ratbags faces to get a good shot of them doing their kid thing.

Unless you're indoors.

mconwxdr · 11-06-2013, 01:42 PM

I, too, thank you for asking this question. I had a K200D and no matter what AF lens I used (F50/1.7, DA70, 18-55, Tamron 70-300) it seemed to be too slow to capture my toddler in focus reliably. I tried the MF A 50/f2 with catch-in focus but that didn't get me any greater percentage of keepers. My best bet was to do what Andi Lo suggested above: pre-focus to an area, use aperature in 2.5-3.2 range, and continuous shutter release, and hope for the best.

I now have a K-5 and the focus is faster for any lens, as is very fast with the DA35. BUT, I agree with others that 35mm is too wide for kid shots. I feel like I'm shoving the camera in their faces and altering their behavior too much (hence, my DA35 for sale here!). I'm going to try a DA50 once I sell my DA35.

Joojoo2010 · 11-06-2013, 05:21 PM

With kids zooms are handy cos most kids are moving a lot. Fixed 50mm is good especially in low light but can be too tele inside sometimes. Mostly i use FA 50 or tamron 17-50 sometimes also da 55-300 or tamron 28-75. In kids party i like tamron 18-200 cos no need to changelens.

**rbefly** · 11-06-2013, 08:22 PM

Here's an alternative lens that should work pretty well; The Pentax F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro zoom. This little gem sells regularly on eBay for about $50.00 USD. Plenty of members have and love this lens, myself included. It has about the fastest AF action of any Pentax lens I've ever seen and it's accurate focusing, too. Hardly bigger than a 50mm prime, a useful 'kids' focal range and a very handy 'Macro' (actually close-focus) function at the 70mm end.
Drawbacks? Well, it's not super-fast in aperture, but most of my shots are in the f/4-5.6 range anyway. Not quite as sharp at 70mm as in the shorter FL's. It's a bit noisy in AF, buzzing to the exact focus in a split-second, stopping so quickly it seems unreal. Wrrrrr-clunk! Beep. Just like that, or maybe a little faster.
A fun, compact and unassuming lens with genuine personality, for a bargain price. Try one!
JMO,
Ron

jaywes · 11-06-2013, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by rbefly

Here's an alternative lens that should work pretty well; The Pentax F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro zoom. This little gem sells regularly on eBay for about $50.00 USD. Plenty of members have and love this lens, myself included. It has about the fastest AF action of any Pentax lens I've ever seen and it's accurate focusing, too. Hardly bigger than a 50mm prime, a useful 'kids' focal range and a very handy 'Macro' (actually close-focus) function at the 70mm end.
Drawbacks? Well, it's not super-fast in aperture, but most of my shots are in the f/4-5.6 range anyway. Not quite as sharp at 70mm as in the shorter FL's. It's a bit noisy in AF, buzzing to the exact focus in a split-second, stopping so quickly it seems unreal. Wrrrrr-clunk! Beep. Just like that, or maybe a little faster.
A fun, compact and unassuming lens with genuine personality, for a bargain price. Try one!
JMO,
Ron

I actually sold off this lens for a FA 28-70 f4 lens. I'm actually beating myself up for not keeping it and having both. I use the FA as a walk around lens but it seems a lil slower to focus and is slightly bigger. Didn't use either with my children. Will have to see. May have to just pick up another 35-70.

I agree with what many have said about creating distance (longer FL) to capture kids in action but this generally is outdoors. Plus this is older children. >3 yrs old and you can't let them out of your sight and are usually within 10ft or less. My two are both under 2. I look forward to letting them just go and play and I can capture them in their splendor.

Bagga_Txips · 11-07-2013, 04:00 PM

Aaaagh, what is it about my favourite lens for this kind of situation that makes people always forget it?

Get yourself a Pentax 40 f2.8 XS - small and ignore able, quick and quiet focussing, cheap to buy, great IQ. What's not to like?

twitch · 11-07-2013, 04:48 PM

As you've probably gathered by now there's no right answer. I like primes, especially FA primes, they get me excited about taking photos so for me they're the right answer

Kameko · 11-07-2013, 10:47 PM

I don't see what's wrong with the 50/1.7, I have the F version and absolutely love it. Me being stubborn have only shot in manual mode and am really happy with the images I've produced. While they may not be kids, it's my go to lens when out at dog training:

If you can find an F 50 f1.7 or even FA I'd go for that. I've found that they're really reasonably priced if one comes available.

10-07-2013, 06:50 PM	#17
callmescipio New Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 7 Original Poster	My local kijiji has an ad for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 (a year old) for $280 (CDN). Worth jumping on? (I still think I want an autofocus prime, but agree that an upgrade from the kit zoom lens would also be very very useful.) Is there a big difference between Tamron and Sigma lenses? (Sorry, I'm really new to the whole 'move past the kit lens' thing.) Last edited by callmescipio; 10-07-2013 at 07:08 PM.

11-06-2013, 08:22 PM	#26
rbefly Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Denver, Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 2,030	Another Idea? Here's an alternative lens that should work pretty well; The Pentax F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro zoom. This little gem sells regularly on eBay for about $50.00 USD. Plenty of members have and love this lens, myself included. It has about the fastest AF action of any Pentax lens I've ever seen and it's accurate focusing, too. Hardly bigger than a 50mm prime, a useful 'kids' focal range and a very handy 'Macro' (actually close-focus) function at the 70mm end. Drawbacks? Well, it's not super-fast in aperture, but most of my shots are in the f/4-5.6 range anyway. Not quite as sharp at 70mm as in the shorter FL's. It's a bit noisy in AF, buzzing to the exact focus in a split-second, stopping so quickly it seems unreal. Wrrrrr-clunk! Beep. Just like that, or maybe a little faster. A fun, compact and unassuming lens with genuine personality, for a bargain price. Try one! JMO, Ron

11-07-2013, 04:48 PM	#29
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	As you've probably gathered by now there's no right answer. I like primes, especially FA primes, they get me excited about taking photos so for me they're the right answer Last edited by twitch; 11-07-2013 at 05:06 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Best lens for portrait	Leonski, Macedonia	Visitors' Center	7	08-06-2013 03:31 PM
Portrait lens for Q?	ElvisQ	Pentax Q	47	04-15-2013 12:52 AM
Portrait lens for K5?	AngF	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	05-03-2012 02:26 PM
Zoom lens for portrait	bessa66	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	12-23-2011 05:10 PM
People two children portrait	devisor	Post Your Photos!	2	11-22-2010 04:05 PM

10-04-2013, 10:17 AM	#16
jaywes Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: New York, USA Posts: 235	I'd have to agree. Utilizing a prime with a toddler is extremely difficult and constricting to say the least. My son is 14.5 months and he is all over. I got more useable shots when he was younger and less mobile. I would second a zoom. I have a M-50 1.4 & A-50 1.2 as well as M-28 2.8 & Gem M-135 2.8 which I use far less if at all for my son. My tamron 17-50 f2.8 lives on my k-r/k-5. I have lots that I have not gotten a chance to upload (the 5% keepers). You can see a handful here: Baby Noah - a set on Flickr

10-07-2013, 09:35 PM	#18
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by callmescipio My local kijiji has an ad for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 (a year old) for $280 (CDN). Worth jumping on? (I still think I want an autofocus prime, but agree that an upgrade from the kit zoom lens would also be very very useful.) It's useful for times when you know you want to take shots, but don't know if the prime will be right for those shots. The wide aperture (for a zoom) adds some other options that the 18-55 won't do. It will work well with a flash too, using the wide aperture to let in more ambient light and allowing the flash to fire at a lower power setting.

10-31-2013, 03:05 PM	#19
Morro New Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 12	As a father of 8 month old and a K100D owner I think something like Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL or Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-4.5 would be very good and affordable. I have Pentax 50mm 1.4, and while I love the photos, the 50mm on 1.5 crop factor make me step back pretty far. A lot of Kodak moments go untaken. I think something in 28-35mm range would be more useful. I also don't like to haul heavy lens as the camera with AA batteries is pretty heavy.

11-03-2013, 09:30 AM	#20
BigAshDog New Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: St. Louis Metro East Photos: Albums Posts: 9	I have zero information for you but, as a newbie with squiggly children, wanted to thank you for asking this question.

11-05-2013, 10:29 PM	#21
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	I'll second the 28-75 tamron. I picked a used one up cheap recently and got a chance to actually use it for the first time this last weekend - a small number of sample shots here: Flickr

11-06-2013, 03:20 AM	#22
Ben78 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tamworth, NSW Posts: 158	FA50/1.4 has been the run-to for me through the lives of my now 6 1/2 and 4 1/2 year olds. I like the slightly longer aspect the 50 gives over (say) 28 and 35mm focal length as you can keep back from the action and avoid the 'typical' ruining the moment by being a focal point of the kids. Even longer has had a decent run on my kids over the years, something about being able to capture them without having any idea you are watching... Attachment 193971 Sigma APO 400/5.6 Attachment 193972 Makinon 135/2.8 (edit, I don't know what lens this is - exif says 135mm @f7.1 but the Makinon is the only 135mm lens I have owned, but it was only K mount not KA. I have never owned a zoom in this range that would transmit the focal length..... So I dunno! Either way its good and sharp and he was jumping on a trampoline) Attachment 193973 Pentax FA100/2.8 Attachment 193974 Sigma APO 400/5.6 Pentax FA50/1.4 Anyway just trying to say you don't need to be right up in the lil ratbags faces to get a good shot of them doing their kid thing. Last edited by Ben78; 10-18-2014 at 06:44 PM.

11-06-2013, 01:04 PM	#23
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	Originally posted by Ben78 Anyway just trying to say you don't need to be right up in the lil ratbags faces to get a good shot of them doing their kid thing. Unless you're indoors.

11-06-2013, 01:42 PM	#24
mconwxdr Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Oklahoma Photos: Gallery Posts: 344	I, too, thank you for asking this question. I had a K200D and no matter what AF lens I used (F50/1.7, DA70, 18-55, Tamron 70-300) it seemed to be too slow to capture my toddler in focus reliably. I tried the MF A 50/f2 with catch-in focus but that didn't get me any greater percentage of keepers. My best bet was to do what Andi Lo suggested above: pre-focus to an area, use aperature in 2.5-3.2 range, and continuous shutter release, and hope for the best. I now have a K-5 and the focus is faster for any lens, as is very fast with the DA35. BUT, I agree with others that 35mm is too wide for kid shots. I feel like I'm shoving the camera in their faces and altering their behavior too much (hence, my DA35 for sale here!). I'm going to try a DA50 once I sell my DA35.

11-06-2013, 05:21 PM	#25
Joojoo2010 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 306	With kids zooms are handy cos most kids are moving a lot. Fixed 50mm is good especially in low light but can be too tele inside sometimes. Mostly i use FA 50 or tamron 17-50 sometimes also da 55-300 or tamron 28-75. In kids party i like tamron 18-200 cos no need to changelens.

11-06-2013, 10:11 PM	#27
jaywes Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: New York, USA Posts: 235	Originally posted by rbefly Here's an alternative lens that should work pretty well; The Pentax F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro zoom. This little gem sells regularly on eBay for about $50.00 USD. Plenty of members have and love this lens, myself included. It has about the fastest AF action of any Pentax lens I've ever seen and it's accurate focusing, too. Hardly bigger than a 50mm prime, a useful 'kids' focal range and a very handy 'Macro' (actually close-focus) function at the 70mm end. Drawbacks? Well, it's not super-fast in aperture, but most of my shots are in the f/4-5.6 range anyway. Not quite as sharp at 70mm as in the shorter FL's. It's a bit noisy in AF, buzzing to the exact focus in a split-second, stopping so quickly it seems unreal. Wrrrrr-clunk! Beep. Just like that, or maybe a little faster. A fun, compact and unassuming lens with genuine personality, for a bargain price. Try one! JMO, Ron I actually sold off this lens for a FA 28-70 f4 lens. I'm actually beating myself up for not keeping it and having both. I use the FA as a walk around lens but it seems a lil slower to focus and is slightly bigger. Didn't use either with my children. Will have to see. May have to just pick up another 35-70. I agree with what many have said about creating distance (longer FL) to capture kids in action but this generally is outdoors. Plus this is older children. >3 yrs old and you can't let them out of your sight and are usually within 10ft or less. My two are both under 2. I look forward to letting them just go and play and I can capture them in their splendor.

11-07-2013, 04:00 PM	#28
Bagga_Txips Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Waterford Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 454	Aaaagh, what is it about my favourite lens for this kind of situation that makes people always forget it? Get yourself a Pentax 40 f2.8 XS - small and ignore able, quick and quiet focussing, cheap to buy, great IQ. What's not to like?

11-07-2013, 10:47 PM	#30
Kameko Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: White Rock Photos: Albums Posts: 450	I don't see what's wrong with the 50/1.7, I have the F version and absolutely love it. Me being stubborn have only shot in manual mode and am really happy with the images I've produced. While they may not be kids, it's my go to lens when out at dog training: If you can find an F 50 f1.7 or even FA I'd go for that. I've found that they're really reasonably priced if one comes available.