Flash photos

[kundalini]

do you have a window? That is what I would use You don't NEED all that stuff to take a decent pic. Especially since it is your baby and you will have all the time in the world to wait around for perfect light! Rather than spending $$$ on lighting I would invest in a nice lens with ability to use a wide aperture.

I strongly disagree. A kit lens is perfectly fine IF you have good lighting. The problem with relying on ambient light is you have absolutely no control if it decides to be shy. You also can't count on it to be there when the newborn is in a good mood for a session. Having a very basic lighting kit and knowing how to use it will yield more consistent results.

I've seen too many here trying to shoot wide open with poor results. A good aperture range for portraiture IMO is f/4 to f/9.

 

[MLeeK]

I agree with Kundalini up there about the kit lens, however... I encourage anyone to purchase that 50 f/1.8 while learning for a multitude of reasons.

 

[sactown024]

I agree with Kundalini up there about the kit lens, however... I encourage anyone to purchase that 50 f/1.8 while learning for a multitude of reasons.

yeah I have a kit lens and getting the 50mm 1.8 along with a 55-250 (assume this is not a good portrait lens) and a 8mm fish eye. I hear the 50mm is very sharp and gives a much stronger background blur than the kit lens (true?) If I am shooting with flash is there any reason to use the 50mm over the kit lens?

 

[kundalini]

I find the 50mm f/1.8 to be boring, even on a FF camera. The bokeh (rendering quality of the OOF background) is disappointing, by and large, because of the square aperture blades. But, for a buck and a quarter, it's not a bad investment.

 

[MLeeK]

I agree with Kundalini up there about the kit lens, however... I encourage anyone to purchase that 50 f/1.8 while learning for a multitude of reasons.

yeah I have a kit lens and getting the 50mm 1.8 along with a 55-250 (assume this is not a good portrait lens) and a 8mm fish eye. I hear the 50mm is very sharp and gives a much stronger background blur than the kit lens (true?) If I am shooting with flash is there any reason to use the 50mm over the kit lens?

The 50mm will always be sharper and crisper than the kit lens. That's not really the only deciding factor in whether you use it or not. If the 50mm doesn't fit the shoot, it's kind of a waste to use it and sacrifice the images because it's too tight.

 

[paigew]

do you have a window? That is what I would use You don't NEED all that stuff to take a decent pic. Especially since it is your baby and you will have all the time in the world to wait around for perfect light! Rather than spending $$$ on lighting I would invest in a nice lens with ability to use a wide aperture.

These aren't the best examples in the world but I have only done one newborn shoot at it was months ago. Taken using window light:

Natural (AMBIENT) light is nice when you have it.. but what about shots at night? Or on a really cloudy day, when it is DIM inside? Flash allows shots ANYTIME!

If it is rainy she can do it the next day...its her own newborn. I think it is so backwards for people to try and learn flash/studio lighting before they master natural light. How do you know what lighting you are trying to create if you haven't experienced shooting in that situation?

 

[sactown024]

I agree with Kundalini up there about the kit lens, however... I encourage anyone to purchase that 50 f/1.8 while learning for a multitude of reasons.

yeah I have a kit lens and getting the 50mm 1.8 along with a 55-250 (assume this is not a good portrait lens) and a 8mm fish eye. I hear the 50mm is very sharp and gives a much stronger background blur than the kit lens (true?) If I am shooting with flash is there any reason to use the 50mm over the kit lens?

The 50mm will always be sharper and crisper than the kit lens. That's not really the only deciding factor in whether you use it or not. If the 50mm doesn't fit the shoot, it's kind of a waste to use it and sacrifice the images because it's too tight.

point taken, if i had the money i would buy the 50mm 1.4 usm but that aint happening right now. I am actually trying to sell my fish eye and kit lens so i can get the 50mm 1.4

 

[cgipson1]

do you have a window? That is what I would use You don't NEED all that stuff to take a decent pic. Especially since it is your baby and you will have all the time in the world to wait around for perfect light! Rather than spending $$$ on lighting I would invest in a nice lens with ability to use a wide aperture.

These aren't the best examples in the world but I have only done one newborn shoot at it was months ago. Taken using window light:

Natural (AMBIENT) light is nice when you have it.. but what about shots at night? Or on a really cloudy day, when it is DIM inside? Flash allows shots ANYTIME!

If it is rainy she can do it the next day...its her own newborn. I think it is so backwards for people to try and learn flash/studio lighting before they master natural light. How do you know what lighting you are trying to create if you haven't experienced shooting in that situation?

Good ambient light is only available a couple of hours of the day... unless you use large diffusers. I think most people prefer to shoot when they want to... rather than relying on the vagaries of so-called "Natural" light! You really seem to have a bias against flash... do you even use flash?

 

[kundalini]

I think it is so backwards for people to try and learn flash/studio lighting before they master natural light. How do you know what lighting you are trying to create if you haven't experienced shooting in that situation?

Learning flash photography is like reciting the multiplication table. Yeah, it's confusing in the beginning, but the further along you get, the easier it is to understand the concept. Ambient or natural light is throwing in algebra, trig and a bit of calculus in the mix. Once you understand how to control the light in a controlled environment, the easier it is to control it under less than ideal situations. So IMO, you have it backwards.

 

[cgipson1]

I think it is so backwards for people to try and learn flash/studio lighting before they master natural light. How do you know what lighting you are trying to create if you haven't experienced shooting in that situation?

Learning flash photography is like reciting the multiplication table. Yeah, it's confusing in the beginning, but the further along you get, the easier it is to understand the concept. Ambient or natural light is throwing in algebra, trig and a bit of calculus in the mix. Once you understand how to control the light in a controlled environment, the easier it is to control it under less than ideal situations. So IMO, you have it backwards.

I agree with this totally! It is much easier to control flash... AMBIENT light (all light is NATURAL) can be a PITA unless you are prepared for it. And based on photos I have seen.. most "Natural Light" photographers don't have a friggin clue! lol! (and they don't know how to use flash either! WOW!)

 

[paigew]

do you have a window? That is what I would use You don't NEED all that stuff to take a decent pic. Especially since it is your baby and you will have all the time in the world to wait around for perfect light! Rather than spending $$$ on lighting I would invest in a nice lens with ability to use a wide aperture.

I strongly disagree. A kit lens is perfectly fine IF you have good lighting. The problem with relying on ambient light is you have absolutely no control if it decides to be shy. You also can't count on it to be there when the newborn is in a good mood for a session. Having a very basic lighting kit and knowing how to use it will yield more consistent results.

I've seen too many here trying to shoot wide open with poor results. A good aperture range for portraiture IMO is f/4 to f/9.

if she got a 1.8 she could shoot at 3.2 which is plenty narrow for a novice. When beginners use flash usually it looks horrible. Beginners using natural light generally looks better. I'm thinking if it was my newborn I would want them to look better

 

[sactown024]

do you have a window? That is what I would use You don't NEED all that stuff to take a decent pic. Especially since it is your baby and you will have all the time in the world to wait around for perfect light! Rather than spending $$$ on lighting I would invest in a nice lens with ability to use a wide aperture.

I strongly disagree. A kit lens is perfectly fine IF you have good lighting. The problem with relying on ambient light is you have absolutely no control if it decides to be shy. You also can't count on it to be there when the newborn is in a good mood for a session. Having a very basic lighting kit and knowing how to use it will yield more consistent results.

I've seen too many here trying to shoot wide open with poor results. A good aperture range for portraiture IMO is f/4 to f/9.

if she got a 1.8 she could shoot at 3.2 which is plenty narrow for a novice. When beginners use flash usually it looks horrible. Beginners using natural light generally looks better. I'm thinking if it was my newborn I would want them to look better

I am a guy.... but i was going to get the 1.8 either way and i want to learn flash so i was going to use the newborn for that, if they come out bad it is still good practice i can then always go back to no flash and use the 1.8 aperture.

 

[cgipson1]

I strongly disagree. A kit lens is perfectly fine IF you have good lighting. The problem with relying on ambient light is you have absolutely no control if it decides to be shy. You also can't count on it to be there when the newborn is in a good mood for a session. Having a very basic lighting kit and knowing how to use it will yield more consistent results.

I've seen too many here trying to shoot wide open with poor results. A good aperture range for portraiture IMO is f/4 to f/9.

if she got a 1.8 she could shoot at 3.2 which is plenty narrow for a novice. When beginners use flash usually it looks horrible. Beginners using natural light generally looks better. I'm thinking if it was my newborn I would want them to look better

I am a guy.... but i was going to get the 1.8 either way and i want to learn flash so i was going to use the newborn for that, if they come out bad it is still good practice i can then always go back to no flash and use the 1.8 aperture.

Uh.. no.. you really DON'T want to use that 1.8 aperture. One of the biggest issues we see with people complaining about out of focus photos... is that they are using a 1.4 or 1.8 aperture without understanding the limitations involved. Your depth of field at those apertures makes it difficult to get good shots... at least until you understand the why and how of it.

 

[sactown024]

okay, well then 2.8 aperture, i just want a indoor lens that wont break the bank. can you explain or link a "how to" for shooting at low aperture?

correct me if i am wrong but the lower the aperture the better the background blur right? but can create out of focus photos?

 

[o hey tyler]

I am going to order them from basically wherever someone tells me is the best place to, B&H or Adorama would be fine since my local shop kinda sucks. Speaking of which... I just went down there and they had a Nissin speedlite and they told my Nissin makes canon and Nissin brand is much better.... do you know anything about this?

I know that it is not true.