1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Budget portrait lens for newborns

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by BB70Chevelle, Jun 7, 2016.

  1. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    New to the forum and to the world of m43. Previously I shot with a canon 7D and tamron F2.8 VC glass but due to lack of use I decided to sell everything to do other project around the house only to find out just recently my wife is pregnant with twins and now I need a camera again. I pre ordered a gx85 with kit lens and a P42.5 F1.7 and I'm trying to decide what's a good budget friendly prime for indoor shots of the babies? I was thinking about the 20 F1.7 or the sigma 30 F1.4 but I wanted some opinions. The sigma is at the max end of my budget.
     
  2. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    You have the 25mm f1.7 and 42.5mm f1.7 in your gear signature. To be perfectly honest, those would be the two I would have suggested anyway. Are you unsatisfied with those? (Or have you not received them yet?)
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Wisertime

    Wisertime Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 6, 2013
    Philly
    Steve
    You already got the P42.5. Problem Solved.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  4. SVQuant

    SVQuant Mu-43 Top Veteran

    855
    Sep 20, 2015
    SF Bay Area, California, USA
    Sameer
    Jim,

    As dad of 3, all my baby shots were taken with 50mm equivalents. While occasionally a little long, it is a good length for you to consider. So I would use the 25/1.7 which you already own.

    Edit: And you can use the 42.5 for close-ups.
     
  5. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    I haven't ordered the 25 yet but was planning to and started reading on here about alot of lenses and then wasn't so sure and now want to make sure I was making a good choice before doing it.
     
  6. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    Haven't ordered the 25 yet but was planning to before reading a bunch and now not being as sure. I figured the 42.5 would be good for face portraits and outdoor shots but I want something wider for full body shots and shots of both twins together.
     
  7. JensM

    JensM Mu-43 Regular

    188
    Mar 6, 2016
    Oslo(ish), Norway
    As screename
    I got one, based on this review: havent put it trough the wringer, yet. But what little use I have had with it, I am rather happy.
     
  8. SVQuant

    SVQuant Mu-43 Top Veteran

    855
    Sep 20, 2015
    SF Bay Area, California, USA
    Sameer
    As long as you are willing to zoom a little with your feet, then 25mm should be a good focal length for the twins together, though the 20mm may be better suited to the 'baby in the crib' shot you will want to take initially. The O25/1.8 (which I own) is also a very nice lens and is smaller than the P25/1.7. Can be found used LNIB for a little over 200 dollars if you are patient. The 30 will be too long and I would avoid it. You might consider the 17mm focal length, but the 17/1.8 runs about 100 dollars more than the 25s or the 20.

    FWIW, I also prefer the 50mm equivalent perspective for baby shots over the slightly wider ones. But you may feel differently about it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    With the 25 and 42.5 already in your pocket the only other budget option is the Sigma 60. A little more reach and a great lens.
     
  10. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    This has me thinking a bit, I do have the kit lens but do I upgrade it to the 25 or do I add the 60 to my 42 and this winter try to talk the wife into letting me get the 12-35 F2.8...
     
  11. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    25/1.7 + 42.5/1.7

    You also have the kit lens that is a good one. You may use that to test a couple of focal lengths, 17mm and 25mm for example, before buying anything else. The "right" focal length depends a lot on what shots you have in mind, how big are the spaces in your house (for example the 25 may be too long for the bathroom but good for the bedroom), in what situations you are most likely to get pictures, etc.

    The autofocus on the 20/1.7 is quite slow and many do not like it for this reason.
     
  12. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Panasonic 25mm f1.7 is pretty good, but if you can find an OK deal on the Olympus 25mm f1.8 I would do that. It's a better lens, but of course it will be at least $100 more. 20mm f1.7 AF was a bit frustrating for me for toddlers, but it should be OK with babies and children who are older. Although you'll be in the toddler phase really soon, so I'd have a hard time recommending it. If you wanted a wider lens than 25mm with fast AF, the 17mm f1.8 is a nice choice. It pairs well with the 42.5mm as a 2-lens combo.

    There's practically a million ways you can go with m4/3 as there are a lot of similar lenses. But I really don't think you need both the 42.5mm and the 60mm. They are really very close in purpose and results. If you already have the 42.5mm, I'd stick with that.

    You've had an SLR before, so you probably have a good idea what works for you. If you liked f2.8 zooms on the Canon, then maybe you shouldn't go after a big bundle of primes and work towards the 12-35 and 35-100mm f2.8 combo. On the other hand if you hated the size/weight and want tiny lense, then maybe you do want 2-3 light primes (or 4 or 5... :))

    I came from Canon, too. One thing I am floored with is how good all of the lenses in m4/3 land are. The "bad" ones are like the best non-L ones for Canon. The good ones are up there with Canon L easily. M4/3 has GREAT lenses. So don't sweat it too much. You can't lose.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  13. greenjp

    greenjp Mu-43 Regular

    69
    May 15, 2014
    Maryland
    I have been using the 20 1.7 for 3 years now, first on a G3 and more recently on a GX7. It is a great focal length for indoor pictures of people, big and small. IMO the autofocus is fast enough even for photographing the swiftest of newborns. In fact I've had quite good luck with it taking pictures of my older kids (now 6.5 and 4) who actually run around too. Some would tell you this is not possible but honestly I don't think the focusing speed is really that bad. It's not instantaneous like the kit zooms or my 45 1.8, but I think it's fine. I quite like its small size as well.

    All that said I think any of the fast 17, 20, and 25mm primes would be fine.

    If you already have the 42.5 1.7 I'd skip the Sigma 60. I'm not sure the Sigma will enable you to take much different pictures, as nice as it is. Maybe look at one of the 40/45-150 kit zooms? They're really nice and inexpensive for general outdoor use.

    jeff
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  14. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I would agree, but really you shouldn't need f1.7 for that. Kit lens at f4 with some OIS will do great.

    TBH, I don't even think you need fast lenses for little babies. They aren't going anywhere. Open some blinds, use a little OIS and have fun. Use a makeshift reflector if you need. Be creative.

    Now when they get mobile - that's another story! :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. ionian

    ionian Mu-43 Veteran

    399
    May 20, 2016
    Kent, UK
    Simon
    Without wishing to state the obvious,babies are small and need shorter focal lenses Their faces are also less prone to looking weird when shooting with a wider angle up close (personal opinion, YMMV). A 25mm will be fine, but as@tkblsc notes, a kit lens will do the job just as well. They will be lying down, no real need for shallow depth of field. As they get older you may want to get some bokeh action going - once they can hold their heads up. My little one is now 2, and the O45mm loves her almost as much as I do.

    Oh, and although the camera gear is important, let's not forget to say massive congrats to you and Mrs Colraine! Don't get too hung up on gear, concentrate on getting through the next few months...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    Thank you everyone for your input I decided to stick to my original plan and just ordered the P25 F1.7 to go with my P42.5. I think this with the kit lens should cover everything at least for awhile and I'm excited to learn this system and to start shooting. Main reason I didn't go back with Canon was really I just wanted to try something new and different. The size and weight never bothered me(though this gear being smaller I'd still say is a plus eapically when my wife uses it.) or the iq I just felt like doing something different.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Good choice, 25mm/42.5mm will be ideal. I have a 4 month old and found 25mm/45mm just fine (these days I usually just use the 12-40 though). 25mm is ideal if you want to get pictures of baby with grandparents, etc, whereas a short telephoto often feels a bit too far. Babies are cute with their giant heads anyway so a wider lens is not a problem.
     
  18. Zuri

    Zuri Mu-43 Regular

    155
    Apr 20, 2016
    I got the 42.5 & 25 f1.7 myself, together with 14-140 when I need the reach. It's really enough for almost anything.

    I will mention that most of my *golden* photos of my baby girl & wife were taken with the 42.5. I personally love the focal range and I just get better photos with it than the 25. I use 25 only when I need a wider range.

    Sent from my SM-G935F
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. BB70Chevelle

    BB70Chevelle Mu-43 Rookie

    15
    Jun 7, 2016
    TN
    Jim
    That's my thinking that the 42 will be my most used lens but I wanted something wider for situation that require it and as they grow and I still need F1.7. Once they get running around and going outside I'd really like to add the oly 40-150 F2.8 though it may feel awkward with how small the gx85 is so I may stick with the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 when that time comes but its hard to resist F2.8 at 300mm (35mm equivalent) for only a slight price increase.

    I'm really liking the lenses choices available for the m43 system with Canon I couldn't even dream of F2.8 @ 300mm without spending $6000 or the new 300 F4 that in canon would be over 10k for a 600mm.
     
  20. flamingfish

    flamingfish Mu-43 Top Veteran

    771
    Nov 16, 2012
    Emily
    Every time I see the title of this thread, I think, "Why do you need a lens for a newborn? Newborns are too small to use a camera." :)

    Congratulations on the new additions to your family, anyway!
     
    • Funny Funny x 7