LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Best lens for newborn photos

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 17 Mar 2009 (Tuesday) 03:24   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
Poll"What lens is the best option for newborn babies?"

Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro
7
18.4%
Canon 85mm f/1.2
16
42.1%
Canon 85mm f/1.2 with extension tube
3
7.9%
Canon 24-105 f/4
10
26.3%
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS
2
5.3%

38 voters, 38 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
 
SunTsu
Goldmember
SunTsu's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
1,580 posts
Westcoast, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

Just wondering what lens/combo you think is best for newborn (like one week new) photos. (I'm only including the lenses that I own). I'm inclined to think either the 100mm macro or the 85 f/1.2 with extension tube. I'm specifically referring to use on a full-frame body.

Post #1, Mar 17, 2009 03:24:42


Canon 5D Mark II+BG-E6, Canon 5D+BG-E4 | 200-400mmL IS, 85mm F1.2L II, TS-E 17mm F4.0L , 16-35mm F2.8L II, 24-105mmL IS, 70-200mm [COLOR=#000000]F2.8L II IS, 100mm F2.8L Macro IS, 100mm F2.8 Macro, 40mm F2.8, 1.4x II, 2.0x III | EF12+25 II | Canon 600EX-RT (x5) | Gitzo support
Full Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
joe ­ mama
Senior Member
joe mama's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
666 posts
Earth
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

Were it me (and it was/is), it would be the 24 / 1.4L and 15 / 2.8 FE. For example:

Canon 5D + 24 / 1.4L @ f / 2, 1/60, ISO 1600

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/image/92131266external link

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/92131266/original.jpg


Canon 5D + 24 / 1.4L @ f / 2.8, 1/50, ISO 400

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/image/96627913external link

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/96627913/original.jpg



Unfortunately, I didn't get my 15 / 2.8 FE until sometime later:

Canon 5D + 15 / 2.8 FE @ f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 1600

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/image/106560765external link

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/106560765/original.jpg


Canon 5D + 15 / 2.8 FE @ f / 2.8, 1/100, ISO 3200

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/image/109433099external link

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/joemama/image/109433099/original.jpg

Post #2, Mar 17, 2009 03:56:36


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.comexternal link
www.pbase.com/joemamaexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sleepo
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2008
248 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Nice shots... 24 and 15 aren't normally what spring to mind when people ask about baby portraits, but those shots work well :)

I'd go with the 85mm f/1.2, though I don't have the 1.2 (only the 1.8 ) so I don't know what the MFD's like (and whether you need the extension tube).

Post #3, Mar 17, 2009 04:04:41


http://flickr.com/phot​os/stephenhildrey/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
Senior Member
joe mama's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
666 posts
Earth
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

sleepo wrote in post #7539962external link
Nice shots... 24 and 15 aren't normally what spring to mind when people ask about baby portraits, but those shots work well

Thanks! For my tastes and style, the wider AOV and closer perspective that UWAs offer seems more fitting for infants and toddlers than does the more classic framing and perspective used with longer lenses.

Post #4, Mar 17, 2009 04:09:30


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.comexternal link
www.pbase.com/joemamaexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
nuffi
Senior Member
Joined Nov 2008
926 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Hey man. I like how you're being encouraging and all, but shouldn't you get your little one something easier to manage than an SLR? At a week old they don't have a lot of strength or coordination.

I'd recommend a g10 while they're developing their eye.

Post #5, Mar 17, 2009 04:18:56




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
viet
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2007
1,019 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

None of these options, either a fast 24, 35 or 50. You don't want to flash your newborn too much, nor does the hospital.

Post #6, Mar 17, 2009 05:48:49




LOG IN TO REPLY
SunTsu
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
SunTsu's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
1,580 posts
Westcoast, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

I noticed many people recommended a 24-105 and I'm a bit surprised by it. For those that recommended it, could you please explain?

sleepo wrote in post #7539962external link
Nice shots... 24 and 15 aren't normally what spring to mind when people ask about baby portraits, but those shots work well :)

I'd go with the 85mm f/1.2, though I don't have the 1.2 (only the 1.8 ) so I don't know what the MFD's like (and whether you need the extension tube).

I've tried to use the 85 f/1.2 before and the minimum focus distance has been an issue. That's why I thought that an extension tube would be useful. I also figured that since a flash would not be preferred, a fast lens would be useful.

joe mama wrote in post #7539973external link
Thanks! For my tastes and style, the wider AOV and closer perspective that UWAs offer seems more fitting for infants and toddlers than does the more classic framing and perspective used with longer lenses.

I never even thought of using a wide angle lens, but I love the shots and will try using a wider angle.

nuffi wrote in post #7540001external link
Hey man. I like how you're being encouraging and all, but shouldn't you get your little one something easier to manage than an SLR? At a week old they don't have a lot of strength or coordination.

I'd recommend a g10 while they're developing their eye.

LOL.

Post #7, Mar 18, 2009 02:27:42


Canon 5D Mark II+BG-E6, Canon 5D+BG-E4 | 200-400mmL IS, 85mm F1.2L II, TS-E 17mm F4.0L , 16-35mm F2.8L II, 24-105mmL IS, 70-200mm [COLOR=#000000]F2.8L II IS, 100mm F2.8L Macro IS, 100mm F2.8 Macro, 40mm F2.8, 1.4x II, 2.0x III | EF12+25 II | Canon 600EX-RT (x5) | Gitzo support
Full Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
Cream of the Crop
KenjiS's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
20,002 posts
Buffalo, NY
[MORE/SHARE]

nuffi wrote in post #7540001external link
Hey man. I like how you're being encouraging and all, but shouldn't you get your little one something easier to manage than an SLR? At a week old they don't have a lot of strength or coordination.

I'd recommend a g10 while they're developing their eye.

No no no, get them a rebel, the larger control surfaces and buttons will make it alot easier for a little one to hold and use...

Post #8, Mar 18, 2009 02:31:00


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 5D Mark III, Sigma 35mm f/1.4, Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS
Deviantartexternal link
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!)external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
JelleVerherstraeten
Goldmember
JelleVerherstraeten's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
2,433 posts
Antwerp, Belgium
[MORE/SHARE]

The FE makes beautiful pictures. Nice shots!

Post #9, Mar 18, 2009 06:08:40


-Jelle l Gear l Websiteexternal link l facebookexternal link l Twitterexternal link l Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
Joined Sep 2005
8,816 posts
CT
[MORE/SHARE]

For me it would think the 24 & 50.

Post #10, Mar 18, 2009 06:37:26


connecticut wedding photographerexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
bohdank's Avatar
Joined Jan 2008
14,060 posts
Montreal, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

None of your choices, imo, but if those are the only choices, the 24-105. The other lenses are too long.

An extension tube on those lenses would give you, in some cases, only a few inches of focus range (I asked about tubes on another thread), so that's not an option.

Post #11, Mar 18, 2009 06:44:32


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographerexternal link
Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
trevstro
Member
trevstro's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
71 posts
Roswell, GA
[MORE/SHARE]

I will be using the 24 1.4 II on Friday for the birth of my daughter. I have a 17-55, but rented the 24 for the next few weeks. I really like the minimum focusing distance of the 24.

Post #12, Mar 18, 2009 07:30:43 as a reply to bohdank's post 46 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
10,247 posts
Philly 'burbs
[MORE/SHARE]

I shot my son on his "birthday" with my 85 and 30 primes (on my 40D) I didn't start to "flash" him until week #2.

Post #13, Mar 18, 2009 07:41:58 as a reply to trevstro's post 11 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
sebr's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
4,594 posts
Sweden/France
[MORE/SHARE]

I would intuitively go for a set of primes, like 24+85, because of the need to use natural light. However, newer cameras handle ISO noise rather and f/2.8 zooms will certainly work if you are willing to increasing the ISO.

Edit: Joe, I forgot to say that these shots are stunning !

Post #14, Mar 18, 2009 07:47:12


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M ; 22/2.0 STM ; EF adapter ; G7 X
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
7,296 views & 0 likes for this thread
Best lens for newborn photos
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00115 for 7 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
691 guests, 491 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Hurlikai

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.