Newborn Photography

[boomersgot3]

Aren't babies born more or less blind? I doubt flash would hurt them at all. This from a man... so take that info with a grain of salt... lol.

before I took the Leap to Photographer I was a LPN in a neonatal ward at St marys Hospital. Babies are born with fuzzy vision and they can only see about 24 inches away. but the bright light will hurt thier eyes. Imagine being in the dark for a few months and someone pointing a bright light at your eyes. That is why they squint somuch for the first few days. you don't want to use a flash. I have doen several newborn shoots in the hospital and 2 births. I use my 50mm and Love it. I don't recommend going too low on your ap. Stay about 2 2.5ish
I have since upgraded twice to a 50mm 1.4 and just recently to the new 50mm 1.2 YEAH!!! I am in love with it! But I lived with the 50mm 1.8 for a long period of time!
I also use my 24-70mm L lense for births but it is a pricy lense. I take my small reflector with me as well and that is it. Good Luck and PM me with any questions!

 

[Socrates]

Aren't babies born more or less blind? I doubt flash would hurt them at all. This from a man... so take that info with a grain of salt... lol

The 50mm F/1.8 is good in low light, HOWEVER, if you use it at F/1.8, the DOF is razor thin. You will likely end up using it somewhere between F/2.8 and F/4 just so that you can get a face in focus.

At F/1.8, if you are close, it would be easy for the eyes to be in focus and the nose blurred!

This is one time I will not ask to see pics of the results... lmao.

With a 50 mm lens and a DX sensor, you want a distance of about eight feet to get a good selective focus shot. Here's my granddaughter with Nikon's 50 mm f/1.4 wide open on a D80. The lighting was from an SB-600 flash mounted on a Stroboframe bracket.

By the way, the difference between the f/1.8 and the f/1.4 is much more than the minor increase in max aperture. The lens construction is substantially different. With the f/1.8, you really don't want to shoot wide open.

http://web.mac.com/george.dick/Photos/Katie.html

 

[ThePup]

BTW, I initially thought you meant pics taken while IN the operating room during the birth... hence why I said "This is one time I will not ask to see pics of the results..."

What's wrong with that? They can be some beautiful pics! I've seen a lovely black n white shot taken about 10 seconds after being pulled out via caesarian section, still in the doctors hands, cord still attached! Was a really lovely photo.

I Plan on having the K10 in the theatre during our next one in April.

As for flash - I can tell ya, lights in operating rooms are EXTREMLY bright - if babies can deal with that, I think they can deal with a flash...

 

[JerryPH]

Babies are born with fuzzy vision and they can only see about 24 inches away. but the bright light will hurt thier eyes.

Thank-you for the clarification. Ok, I must have confused babies with puppies... lol

 

[JerryPH]

By the way, the difference between the f/1.8 and the f/1.4 is much more than the minor increase in max aperture. The lens construction is substantially different. With the f/1.8, you really don't want to shoot wide open.

Why not? It does an excellent job!

Also I own a Sigma F/1.4, and you are definately not going to want to use that big of an aperture becuase it will have a DOF that is so thin that if you took a picture of a person holding the feet of the baby, the fingers would be badly blurred (way more than desired).

In this picture, the distance is less than 1 inch between the 2 objects and there is MASSIVE bokeh already at F/1.4 (30mm Sigma):

Of course it depends on what pic you want to take, but using the pic of seeing the big hands and tiny feet shot of the baby with a blurred background, for best effect an aperture of about F/4 and a distance of 2-3 feet is suggested for best artistic effect. Everyone will have their own ideas, though, I am sure.