Newborn Photography, which lens for detailed shots?

C

CaelansMummy

Messages
442
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys, I would like to buy a suitable lens to use for close ups of the hands, feet, baby pouts, eyelashes etc! I only have the Sigma 50mm 1.4 and a 70-300 which I have tried to get close ups with the 70-300 with the macro on but either I'm useless or it's the wrong thing to be using!

So any help would be greatly appreciated, thankyou ;)
 
I'd have thought about 80-100 on a full-frame sensor? Should get you close enough.

What about the Sigma 105 macro? Could be worth a go!
 
Wow that was a fast response, thankyou!

I am really clueless when it comes to macro so I will have a good look at those suggestions later on! I do like my Sigma so that sounds like a good option :thumbs:
 
Thankyou Phil, I will give that another shot! I only took it out once in the middle of a session but as I wasn't having any luck I haven't tried again! Time is precious when it comes to newborn and you need to be ready to catch those windy smiles and cute expressions rather than wasting time on other things! :lol:
 
Ideally you'll want to be working with a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens for what you describe.

Far enough away, but not too far as you would be with the 70-300, and able to get 1:1 without a crop.

For newborns I would want to be working with an internally focussing lens, unlike the Sigma 105mm macro which extends out 10cm when focussing - which changes the balance of the camera and stands a chance of hitting the subject.

I'm using the 105mm VR on my Nikon.
 
meonshore said:
Ideally you'll want to be working with a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens for what you describe.

Far enough away, but not too far as you would be with the 70-300, and able to get 1:1 without a crop.

For newborns I would want to be working with an internally focussing lens, unlike the Sigma 105mm macro which extends out 10cm when focussing - which changes the balance of the camera and stands a chance of hitting the subject.

I'm using the 105mm VR on my Nikon.
Click to expand...


That is absolutely fantastic advice! I never even thought of focusing being a problem so thankyou for pointing that out also! I will keep watching on here for a 100mm lens.

I don't know anything about extension tubes either, do they do a similar thing?!
 
CaelansMummy said:
That is absolutely fantastic advice! I never even thought of focusing being a problem so thankyou for pointing that out also! I will keep watching on here for a 100mm lens.

I don't know anything about extension tubes either, do they do a similar thing?!
Click to expand...

For newborns not really no.

You lose infinity focus, and really extension tubes work well for tripod mounted static/fairly static subjects but it would be IMVHO too fiddly to set up and mess around when doing a newborn session.
 
I've got the 100 L macro and it's fantastic for portraits either close up or a fair distance. The 100 f2.8 non L macro has IIRC the same optics as the L version but not the IS, but if you're on a tripod anyway you don't need the IS. You can usually find them around £300 for the non IS version second hand.
 
Thankyou so much everyone, I think I will take a good look for the 100mm. I think one just sold on here so I am sure another will be up for grabs soon. Thankyou all for the advice and pointers, you have been a big help, I feel a tad silly for asking but I didn't want to make the mistake of buying the wrong thing!
 
I'm not so sure that I agree with the consensus towards macro lenses. They tend to be a tad slower to focus than a normal non macro lens and babies don't tend to pose.

Personally I'd go with a fastish focusing lens, the Siggy 50mm f1.4 should be fast enough, in fact it's what I used for these shots (100% crops so you can see the sort of detail possible) ...

IMG_8457.jpg


IMG_8452.jpg


They were indoor shots taken in a quite dim room so I set my 5D to ISO 400 and aperture to f3.2. I could have gone for more DoF by taking the shots more face on and I could also have used a slightly smaller aperture and higher ISO.

Personally I'd want to check the focus speed of a macro lens before attempting a shot like this with one as the macro lenses I own and have owned are simply too slow to AF.

PS. Thinking about the DoF issue. If you go for a longer lens you're probably going to have to use a smaller aperture, and possibly push the ISO up further. It's do-able. But personally I'd go for a fast focusing lens for a good hit rate.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I'm not so sure that I agree with the consensus towards macro lenses. They tend to be a tad slower to focus than a normal non macro lens and babies don't tend to pose.

Personally I'd go with a fastish focusing lens, the Siggy 50mm f1.4 should be fast enough, in fact it's what I used for these shots (100% crops so you can see the sort of detail possible) ...

They were indoor shots taken in a quite dim room so I set my 5D to ISO 400 and aperture to f3.2. I could have gone for more DoF by taking the shots more face on and I could also have used a slightly smaller aperture and higher ISO.

Personally I'd want to check the focus speed of a macro lens before attempting a shot like this with one as the macro lenses I own and have owned are simply too slow to AF.

PS. Thinking about the DoF issue. If you go for a longer lens you're probably going to have to use a smaller aperture, and possibly push the ISO up further. It's do-able. But personally I'd go for a fast focusing lens for a good hit rate.
Click to expand...

I think the OP wanted to get closer than these hiding by the fact that he wanted detailed fingers and eyelashes etc..

I think quality is always better than quantity and getting 100 "ok" shots will never give the wow factor that 3 amazing shots will.

I say go for the macro, take your time with the shots...it's not a toddler that will be moving about a lot, his/her head may move but then you can do a shoot when he/she is sleeping which would probably be more suitable anyway.
 
Well, yes to most of that and you'll be happy to know that my reject rate is very small :)

I'm just worried about the OP ordering a macro lens and then getting stuck with slow AF that wont cut it with low light and a moving baby. I've only had two macro lenses and neither of them could live with the AF speed of a modern fast focusing lens. You could go to MF which is what most people use with these lenses but that could reduce the hit rate.

It's all ifs and buts but personally I'd want to try a macro and assess its AF speed if buying it for this sort of use.
 
woof woof said:
Well, yes to most of that and you'll be happy to know that my reject rate is very small :)

I'm just worried about the OP ordering a macro lens and then getting stuck with slow AF that wont cut it with low light and a moving baby. I've only had two macro lenses and neither of them could live with the AF speed of a modern fast focusing lens. You could go to MF which is what most people use with these lenses but that could reduce the hit rate.

It's all ifs and buts but personally I'd want to try a macro and assess its AF speed if buying it for this sort of use.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I was thinking the same yesterday.

I know Nikon 105mm VR has fast focusing down to about 1:3 can't speak for canon though...
 
woof woof said:
I'm not so sure that I agree with the consensus towards macro lenses. They tend to be a tad slower to focus than a normal non macro lens and babies don't tend to pose.
Click to expand...

Mine do. Although in fairness I pose them. It is unrealistic to expect a 4-10 day old to have that down pat ;)

It entirely depends on the style of photography you shoot. Yours appear to be taken whilst awake, whereas mine are all taken when the baby is asleep and not moving. I may have made an assumption but the OP is asking about newborn photography and the current (professional) style for newborns is sleeping, and posed :baby::baby::baby:

In that case the minuscule difference in AF speed (assuming of course you are using AF) is irrelevent. Whilst I wouldn't want to set up a tripod, with extension tubes, during a session I'm very happy to hand-hold a macro lens. To get those frame filling details I'm after.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top