Photographing a 2 year old

[amazon]

Hi all
I have a 2 year old daughter. I am planning to invest in a good lens (even Ls). Looking for some recommendations. Now the deal is i cant get her to sit in one place. She is all over. So i am looking for a lens to capture her (while in motion :)) and maybe in low light too (inside the house).
In addition i do have some interest in landscape photography.
I had though about Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, but was disappointed in learning about its build quality.
Would 24-70mm 2.8 USM be one option.
This would be for a 30D though.
Thanks all

[kenyc]

Might be better to ask this in the People forum.

KAC

[David Saunders II]

Hi all
I have a 2 year old daughter. I am planning to invest in a good lens (even Ls). Looking for some recommendations. Now the deal is i cant get her to sit in one place. She is all over. So i am looking for a lens to capture her (while in motion :)) and maybe in low light too (inside the house).
In addition i do have some interest in landscape photography.
I had though about Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, but was disappointed in learning about its build quality.
Would 24-70mm 2.8 USM be one option.
This would be for a 30D though.
Thanks all

I've seen this question elsewhere on POTN and have always heard the same thing - Canon "Nifty 50" ( 50mm f/1.8 ) or the 50mm f/1.4. The former is about $80 while the latter is about $300. Both are prime lenses and both are fast lenses - superb for low-light chasing of the young ones. I don't have one (thus my signature) but have shot with my friends' and can't wait to pick one up.

[Ballen Photo]

Might be better to ask this in the People forum.

KAC
How about the "Talk" about photography forum? ;)
-Bruce

[jmpsmash]

i have a 2 yrs old. i found that there are no one good focal length for a 2 yrs old. they run around at home at any speed. they run around outdoor at all speeds. i found myself using the 24-70L, 50/1.4 and 35L quite equally. the 24-70L is probably the best choice when you only want one lens, fast AF, fast aperture, and zoom.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1408/1377586573_3eb5c7a743.jpg

[ibdb]

Primes are great for some things, to me, trying to capture a 2 year old would probably not be one of them.

I'd opt for the added flexibility of a zoom. You'll have more control over your composition. I have three boys (8, 5, and 20 months), and I don't usually break out the primes unless I'm trying to pose them and know they'll be relatively motionless. Foot zooming has its limits, and one of them is keeping up with a constantly moving target. :D

I live with a 24-105 on my 20D. The debate between the -105 and -70 is never ending, but since I rarely found a need for such a shallow depth of field with my walk around lens, the added range of the -105 and the IS won me over. Even with a 2.8 lens, for indoor motion with reasonable depth of field, you're probably going to find yourself in the market for a flash, too.

[photoshopthis]

I have a two year old and i highly recommend using the 50m f/1.4 it's the closeest think to the human eye but i have to admit you are constantly chasing after a moving target.

I also use the 70-200 f/4L which i love I get a few that have motion showing in them from time to time in low light when no flash is present.

So like ibdb said i'd say invest in a flash i see a world of a difference now with the 580 EX II mounted all movement is at a stop.

[suecassidy]

By the time your two year old is three, you won't have nearly as much problem with keeping her still. It is the 14-24 month period that is really difficult with kids, boys a bit longer. TYPICALLY. I've been a children's photographer for many years and find that to generally be true. An alternative to think about: Buy the lens you want that would make you happy and spend TIME figuring out ways to manipulate her into staying still until she gets a bit older.

[In2Photos]

I have used several lenses while trying to capture my daughter, now 2 years and 5 months. The best I have used is what I currently have as well as the 85 1.8. However, for indoor use I prefer a flash than fast glass and here is why. When your little one is moving around and you have a large aperture you can almost forget about getting her in focus. While you will be able to do it here and there the results will not be consistent. A flash allows you to stop down the aperture to get a decent DOF while still stopping the action. It takes some practice but in the end I will always take the flash approach if it is viable.

All but one of these were shot with flash:

http://www.pbase.com/madawson/time_spent_indoors

And most of the outdoor shots have flash used as well:

http://www.pbase.com/madawson/playing_outdoors

[ibdb]

However, for indoor use I prefer a flash than fast glass and here is why. When your little one is moving around and you have a large aperture you can almost forget about getting her in focus. While you will be able to do it here and there the results will not be consistent.

You put it better than I did. Getting and learning a flash opens up a whole new world of photographic opportunities. As I say in my sig:

"You can't shoot everything wide open. Life's not that shallow." -- Me