Now 35 F1.4 or 55 F1.8

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

These are very different focal lengths. I suggest you look at pics taken with both focal lengths, if you are not familiar with them. Also, do you have room to move back, or forward, should it be required? What kind of results do you prefer regarding your pics? Closer? More far away?

You need to answer these questions.

I would think 55 for less facial distortion

That is a lot of money to spend on a system when you have no idea as to what lens focal length you might prefer. perhaps, it would be better to start with a zoom lens. That said, if most of your images are to be taken indoors, the wider coverage would be useful. I might suggest that you look at the new twenty eight millimeter lens in that this seems to be a pretty good option. It is less expensive and provides for relatively fast open aperture. This lens will far out sell the new 35 millimeter. I am a 35mm shooter. I have the 55mm, but will pickup either the new 35mm, 35mm Loxia, or the new 28mm. I'm waiting for the reviews.

Certainly not the 35mm. It is too wide to be a main lens for people shots, even infants. For an occasional baby shot, yes, but you will quickly tire of that as your only perspective. You'll get comments "These are nice, but they look a little weird. Are you too close?"

55mm is ok and usable as an only lens. For decades this was the FF focal length that all cameras came with and for good reason.

Personally I'd recommend, if you can, the kit zoom and a prime. A zoom gives you a lot of "fall back" flexibility that I think is important.

If getting the kit lens and the 55mm is a budget buster for you, I might get the A6000 instead, but if you have your heart set on upgrade to FF, then you'll be a little constrained at first.

I shoot mostly young children and toddlers. For a prime as an addition to the kit zoom, I'd consider the 55mm and the new 90mm, but I'd probably go with the 55mm. Opinions vary of course about "portrait length" (I prefer 75mm f2 for children indoors), but only if my indoor spaces were very large and very well lit would I consider the 90mm for shooting informal portraits of children engaged in normal activities. The longer focal length amplifies the tracking burden on you of their movement and without very bright light you'd be shooting wide open all time, which is not the best. BTW they go from infant to zipping toddler much faster than lenses get old.

All very wise advice. This is too large of an investment to make if you don't know what focal range you like to shoot in. I would invite you to look at the shots you usually take on your MFT system and take that into account.

But to answer your question, if I was in your shoes I would go with the 55mm 1.8. I personally prefer this focal range over 35mm, but it will also give you a tighter frame and better focus on your baby. Congrats!

I have over 40 lenses and almost as many cameras. I have been shooting for a longer period time than many people here have been alive. I married late and recently have raised two young girls, the oldest which is 10 years old. I shoot almost exclusively with the 35mm. When I was doing this professionally that was not the case. So, to make a blanket statement regarding the 35mm, or any lens, is really your preference. Iike is my preference to use 35mm for many of the things that you mentioned. Use a zoom and find out what your preference is. You can purchase these cameras as a kit with lens and sell the zoom kit lens later. Maybe, you will find out that you like zooms rather than primes and then purchase a higher quality zoom as your second lens.

I was talked into the 55 by the guys here. Many Many Thanks guys. So glad I got it.

I've just pre-ordered the 35 1.4.

But one only, the 35 is in my opinion a better choice although as of now its untested.

Brian

For general family / people photography, I prefer the 35mm focal length indoors.

I'd also want the 55, but would start with the 35 for family photos. You will be able to get beautiful images of your baby being held by mom, grandma, family gatherings around the table etc.

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

The 35/1.4 is a very special lens with a very special look, and perfect for indoors available light photography.

I think you will get a lot more use out of it than the 55 for a newborn and baby.

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

35mm you have to go too near to the baby. and the shutter noise might surprised the baby.

50mm above ( for FF) the distance is just nice. 35mm you will have to stick the camera within 2 feet of the baby ( to capture facial expression of your cute baby)

Buy the lens with the focal length you most frequently like to use!

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

Considering the size, preference and need, I would rethink your decision - get the 55mm F1.8.

The 55mm F1.8 will be the most impressive lens for low light and sharpness, and it is a very workable (standard, normal view) FOV.

If you have this lens, then the wider-angle 28 or 35mm FOV does not need to be super-fast. Instead of the (large) 35/1.4 you can opt for the tiny 35/2.8 or the also small (and cheapest) 28/2.0.

When your toddler starts running around, the 35/1.4 may be the winner as it promises fastest AF, but this is a few years away. Why bite at the bit now, as more/other choices may be available by then?

wb2trf said:

Certainly not the 35mm. It is too wide to be a main lens for people shots, even infants. For an occasional baby shot, yes, but you will quickly tire of that as your only perspective. You'll get comments "These are nice, but they look a little weird. Are you too close?"

Click to expand...

Why would you assume the OP thinks just like you? Many people never tire of 35. I shot 90% of my shots for 3 years at 35mm. Many people buy the RX1 and have no other camera so they get 100% of their shots at 35. I think it would be a fantastic focal length for documenting a baby growing. I also think I could make 55 work as I've largely shot 55 for the past year. I am not tired of 35, but I need AF and speed in a lens. Though, the 55 has grown on me.

I'd probably recommend the Zeiss 55/1.8 for the baby just because the lens is so much smaller than the new Zeiss 35/1.4 and they'd both be good focal lengths. And both options will deliver incredible results in the right hands.

The 35 will allow full body shots and contextual shots between baby and mother or others. The 55 can shoot closer portraits, but I suspect a lot of baby shots are more contextual and full body like this (Sigma 35 on FF):



Nobody is going to complain about these kinds of shots from a 35 lens . . . it's terrific for this. As someone mentioned above, go view images on Flickr shot with the 35 perspective (e.g., Sigma 35) and the 55 (e.g., FE 55).

--
My recent favorite shots

mdcromer said:

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

The 35/1.4 is a very special lens with a very special look, and perfect for indoors available light photography.

I think you will get a lot more use out of it than the 55 for a newborn and baby.

Click to expand...

Am I missing something? I thought the lens ships in april? lol

PhotoHobo said:

I am about to jump ship from MFT to FF, I been looking heavily at the A7x (still waiting on the new announcement before pulling the shot).

For Baby and newborn 1st yr of life shooting, Would the New 35 mm F1.4 or 55 F1.8 make more sense as the first Prime I get?. Eventually I will buy other lens, but for the first one and the Only lens that I will use for the first few months

Click to expand...

55/1.8 first. In fact, when my baby was born (before FE was launched), my first native prime was 50/1.8 (75mm equivalent) before moving to 35mm (52.5mm equivalent). Basically you need wider (to capture more context) as the kids get older. In the first year babies really don't do very much, so you're basically shooting straight portraiture with a tiny bit of environment thrown in. You could even get a manual focus 85mm prime for shooting the baby.

This is as close as I'd crop with 55mm:









With 35mm, I would be looking to capture parent and child together, probably with some additional environment thrown in. For example:



I should have stopped down more, I was shooting manual CV 35/1.4

muffhugga said:

Am I missing something? I thought the lens ships in april? lol

Click to expand...

I've seen sample images from it - really has a delightful bokeh and very sharp.

Yep on MFT I have the fantastic 20mm F 1.7 and the 45 mm F1.8. I love them both, they are almost my exclusive go to, also have a zoom as well, but hardly ever use them. I never have kid before so never really have to shoot under those situation. I have sometime to decide but just see what you guys say. I will do a few "true portrait" but most I think some other folk is right it will be family with baby, so more of "environmental portrait"

PhotoHobo said:

Yep on MFT I have the fantastic 20mm F 1.7 and the 45 mm F1.8. I love them both, they are almost my exclusive go to, also have a zoom as well, but hardly ever use them. I never have kid before so never really have to shoot under those situation. I have sometime to decide but just see what you guys say. I will do a few "true portrait" but most I think some other folk is right it will be family with baby, so more of "environmental portrait"

Click to expand...

On my APC-C dSLRs and dSLTs, for indoors / family stuff I almost always use my Sigma 20/1.8

That translates to 30mm on FF and I find it to be just perfect for any kind of indoor people photos.

I will occasionally use longer FL lenses indoors, but just vastly prefer the wide-ish perspective.

It's the focal length equivalent that iPhones have too - and there is a reason for that.

Lots of good advice here.

If I were you I'd consider a zoom first, see how it works out and see if there's a sweet spot focal length where you find yourself shooting most of the time.

I primarily use a 35mm lens. I own the 55/1.8, beautiful lens, weird length. 55mm isn't long enough to separate the background from the subject except at wide open, and not wide enough to capture the scene the way I see it.

So, for me, the 35mm f/1.4 would be the lens to get, and then I'd take a look at the 90mm f/2.8 to see if that performs well as a portrait lens. Just my .02.