Looking for a fast lens for baby pics

With a baby coming soon I need a lens for my D80 that will take good pictures indoors in natural light.

Candidates:

Sigma 30 1.4
Nikkor 35 2.0
Nikkor 50 1.4

Based on what I've read the Sigma seems to suffer from sample variation and soft results overall, I would rather not risk it to be honest. The 35/2 is a stop slower than the other two. The 50 I fear would be too long for general indoor use.

My only lens right now is the 28-105. If the new 16-85 is up to the task and comes in at a reasonable price I could see it replacing my current zoom.

Also - How would you handicap the the choices regarding speedlights? the SB800 is considerably more expensive than the SB600. Where would I see the benefits? Would a Gary Fong light diffuser necessitate a more powerful flash?

Hi Trifona,

Grab a 50 f1.4. If you are looking for fast, low light, sharp with a slight tele to it, this is it. I seldom use mine because I have such great zooms, but I have done some great candids with it. Plus it is lite and vey unassuming! I bought a non D a few years ago off of eBay and it works great. (Plus the 1.4 non D is made in Japan it feels great!)
--
Regards,

Jeff Morris / Homecinemaman

Adams, Gutmann, Steichen, Snoopy, Stigletz, Weston. they lead by example.

I hunt, I peck, I squint, all on a Dell M1210 12.1' laptop. So don't laugh, I'm happy there aren't more typo's!

your choice of lenses, it's a CROP camera?

IF so, go with the 50 which will get you closer to a portrait lens focal length.

The best length is around 80mm or so. Everything else and when you get close to the baby, you'll get a wide angle effect.

So I'd say go with the Nikkor. I personally use the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 with results I like, but it is manual focus so it might not suit what you are looking for. There are lots of examples on my website, if you're interested.



Congrats on your imminent baby!
Kind regards,
Crystal K.
--
http://www.crystalkeesey.com

50 will do....
Boris
50f1.4 at f3.5 (both)





--
Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best
proof of stupidity.
Michel de Montaigne

http://public.fotki.com/borysd/

Unless you have a big house, the 50 (1.8 or 1.4) on a DX sensor will often be too long for indoors. I shoot the 35mm f2.0. I prefer the look of the 35 shots over the 50 1.8 anyway, although my 35 gives a bit of a warm cast.

Boris said:

50 will do....
Boris
50f1.4 at f3.5 (both)





--
Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best
proof of stupidity.
Michel de Montaigne

http://public.fotki.com/borysd/

Click to expand...

--
Great pics Boris, and a very cute girl.

kent

My vote also for the 35 f2.
I sometimes use a 50 f2 MF but it is often a bit too long for me.

I'm also leaning to the 35mm f2 if for no other reason than to be able to get more than one person in a picture which I would think to be difficult with the 50mm, ie mom & grandparents. The catch being losing a full stop over the 50mm 1.4. I worry that I would still need to either crank the iso very high on my D80 or resort to using a speedlight.

If I had to use a speedlight would I still be able to blur the background using a narrow DOF?

Which brings me back to the Sigma 30 1.4....am I in the wrong for wanting to avoid it and is it worth the premium over the Nikkor 35/2?

Nikkor 50mm 1.4, or even the standard 50mm 1.8, which should be more than adequate and half the price - I love mine as a portrait lens on the D70s.

I think the little extra wideness over the 50 will allow you to get more shots in tighter spaces. Many of the shots on my blog (below) of my daughter are shot with the 35/2. Once she's been home, the 35/2 stays on the camera...

Kevin
--
http://leelaycock.blogspot.com

Unless you just need to spend more than you have to.

Just buy the [ Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF ] for around $100.00 dollars.

Heck, some of my filters cost more. It's probably the sharpest/quickest lens for the money.

-Bruce-

1. In my experience the Sigma has the best wide angle focusing capability @ 1.4. And its sharp wide open if you are good at wide-angle focusing. (I think bad focusing technique, rather than sample variation, is the reason for the majority of complaints about this lens).

2. The 35/2 on a crop sensor body (like your D80) might even be tight for two or more people. I was about 5 feet away, and still its tight. (I have the AIS version of the 35):



3. Do you print your photos? Is the noise at high ISO on your D80 that bad in print? I ask this because the noise you see on a computer screen is GREATLY reduced in print, even without noise reduction. If your prints look good, then high ISO is the way to go over flash, imo.

FWIW I bought the Sigma 30mm for the same reason (baby #4), but never ended up using it for the baby, so I sold it. I always grabbed the Zeiss 50 or my 60mm micro for nice close head portraits in low light. And for some reason I preferred a short tele when I take shots of the baby with people. Like this one, lol, taken with the 75-150/2.5 AIS lens, probably at around 75mm. Doesn't he look happy to be holding the babe? LOL. (In this shot I bounced an SB-800, probably at 2.5):



Good luck with your decision. I was in the same place last year .
Crystal

trifona said:

I'm also leaning to the 35mm f2 if for no other reason than to be
able to get more than one person in a picture which I would think to
be difficult with the 50mm, ie mom & grandparents. The catch being
losing a full stop over the 50mm 1.4. I worry that I would still
need to either crank the iso very high on my D80 or resort to using a
speedlight.

If I had to use a speedlight would I still be able to blur the
background using a narrow DOF?

Which brings me back to the Sigma 30 1.4....am I in the wrong for
wanting to avoid it and is it worth the premium over the Nikkor 35/2?

Click to expand...

--
http://www.crystalkeesey.com

but never ended up using it for the baby, so I sold it

You sold the baby?

I love my 50/1.8, and it was only $115. I also have a 24/2.8, which is nice, but if you get tight to your subject you start to get some distortion in the faces (noses, etc). A 35 probably falls somewhere in between the two.

Somebody will undoubtedly suggest an 85mm, but that to me is a studio shooter's lens, you need more room to use it. I get down on the floor with my kids and get great shots with my 50.

Fantastic for portraits up close, and more than one person from across a table, etc.

Here is a link from my blog with some pics of my one-year old.

http://misterfurious.blogspot.com/2008/01/one.html

The first two are with the 50mm. It is an ideal lens for this type of "highchair shot" and the second playground shot is actually at night. Great lens for low light—no flash!

One of these days i'll set up a real site to share my photos...

Thank you Kent.
Boris
--
Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best
proof of stupidity.
Michel de Montaigne

http://public.fotki.com/borysd/

We have a 9 month old baby, I have started with Nikon 50/1.4. Newborn is really small so 50 mm should be OK for the start. (I have used 50/1.8)

Later I've bought Sigma 30/1.4 and I found out that I'm almost not using 50 mm, only rarely. Now when our son is bigger, I would like to capture not only portrait but also things around (when playing, crawling, etc.)

My Sigma suffers from back focus. Otherwise it is great lens and focus problem can be adjusted by sigma service with precision around 1 mm (for HSM lenses). I plan to send my 30/1.4 and S5 for adjustment. Maybe you can take a look at Sigma 28/1.8 it has closer focusing distance so you can use it more creatively.

And of course external flash helps a lot. Consider SB-600, SB-800 or Mets 58 AF-1N

Some with Nikon 50/1.8





Some with Sigma 30/1.4











All shots with D50 (before upgrade to Fuji S5)

Duri

I also got the 50 f/1.4 first and it was perfect for close up shots of my grandkinds when they were tiny. It still works great if they are immobilized in a high chair or playing outside. But it is too long for full body environmental type portraits indoors. After they started to crawl, I pretty much gave up on my 50mm and went to a more flexible zoom. I still have many other uses for my 50mm lens though, so it isn't collecting dust. I would get the 50 now and later get a good external flash to go with your zoom. I also have the 35 f/2 and like it too, but can't use it indoors without a flash unless the kids are right by a window or else I turn up the ISO.
--
Joanna
http://keemra.smugmug.com

I purchased the 50 f/1.4 and it's an excellent lens, but I find it too long. I then purchased the 35 f/2 which is also an excellent lens, but I wish at times it was a bit wider, say the 24-30mm range.

That's why I posed the question if you were purchasing online or from a local B&M. The Sigma 30 f/1.4 is very tempting because of the focal length and the aperture. If I were in your position, I'd compare the Nikkor 35mm f/2 and the Sigma 30 f/1.4.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm glad I have the 50 f/1.4 because it definitely has its uses. If Nikon ever comes out with an affordable WA prime that's f/2 or faster, then I'll own all three!
--
Regards,
M@

my 1st choice would be the AF Nikkor 50/1.4, second choice the 50/1.8 and third the Sigma 30/1.4. I much prefer the short tele feel of the 50mm lens on a APS-sensor body.