Lens for photographing children

[abee]

O

It might be the grain that you're getting at ISO 800 that's bothering you. Do you have the same problem at other ISO's?

On that particular day, if I set the ISO to 400 it was too dark

Oh, I'm not questioning that. I believe you. But when you set it that high on that camera, you get grain, as you can see in the photo, which loses some of the finer details. If you had used flash and lowered the ISO, you probably could have gotten rid of the grain.

I'm guessing you're trying to get it sharp enough to make out individual eyelashes?

I have a flash and did some tests with it and the photos were just AWFUL. I decided against using it. So you think perhaps I should have added more light and put the ISO down to 400 for less graininess?

 

[cherylynne1]

O

It might be the grain that you're getting at ISO 800 that's bothering you. Do you have the same problem at other ISO's?

On that particular day, if I set the ISO to 400 it was too dark

Oh, I'm not questioning that. I believe you. But when you set it that high on that camera, you get grain, as you can see in the photo, which loses some of the finer details. If you had used flash and lowered the ISO, you probably could have gotten rid of the grain.

I'm guessing you're trying to get it sharp enough to make out individual eyelashes?

I have a flash and did some tests with it and the photos were just AWFUL. I decided against using it. So you think perhaps I should have added more light and put the ISO down to 400 for less graininess?

Flash can be difficult to learn to use effectively, but it's incredibly rewarding when you do. You mentioned you have a soft box, correct? It could really help with portraits like this.

Yes, I think getting the ISO down to 400 (or 200 if you can) would have helped with the grain (assuming that's the problem.)

 

[robbins.photo]

O

It might be the grain that you're getting at ISO 800 that's bothering you. Do you have the same problem at other ISO's?

On that particular day, if I set the ISO to 400 it was too dark

Oh, I'm not questioning that. I believe you. But when you set it that high on that camera, you get grain, as you can see in the photo, which loses some of the finer details. If you had used flash and lowered the ISO, you probably could have gotten rid of the grain.

I'm guessing you're trying to get it sharp enough to make out individual eyelashes?

I have a flash and did some tests with it and the photos were just AWFUL. I decided against using it. So you think perhaps I should have added more light and put the ISO down to 400 for less graininess?

Well, again from the sample size it's really hard to say - I've never shot a D3200 but I wouldn't think you'd see that much difference at ISO 800, on my D7100 the noise doesn't get noticeable until something around 3200 and it doesn't get bad until I go above 6400.

So when you print this does it look "grainy", or just not sharp? What size is the file your sending to the printer, and what sort of paper is being used?

 

[abee]

I'm a beginner shooting with a Nikon D3200. Currently I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a 50mm 1.8. I'm looking for another lens that will allow me to photograph toddlers and children and produce sharp photos. I have done several cake smash and portraits in a home studio setup of toddlers with my 50mm and although they look great, they are just not at the level of sharpness that I'm looking for. Should I be thinking of a different lens? Or a different body? I was using a tripod and 2 soft box lights. Any advice on a lens to look in to? Would like to keep it under $1000. Thank you.

Lens wise you don't get much sharper than the 50mm prime - so my guess is a someone else mentioned you might have been shooting with your aperture open too wide. Can you post a sample with EXIF?

My apologies as I am new here, what is EXIF? I posted a photo earlier in the thread

Shutter speed, ISO, Aperture settings

ISO 800, aperture 2.8 and I believe the shutter speed was 1/250 (can't remember)

 

[robbins.photo]

I'm a beginner shooting with a Nikon D3200. Currently I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a 50mm 1.8. I'm looking for another lens that will allow me to photograph toddlers and children and produce sharp photos. I have done several cake smash and portraits in a home studio setup of toddlers with my 50mm and although they look great, they are just not at the level of sharpness that I'm looking for. Should I be thinking of a different lens? Or a different body? I was using a tripod and 2 soft box lights. Any advice on a lens to look in to? Would like to keep it under $1000. Thank you.

Lens wise you don't get much sharper than the 50mm prime - so my guess is a someone else mentioned you might have been shooting with your aperture open too wide. Can you post a sample with EXIF?

My apologies as I am new here, what is EXIF? I posted a photo earlier in the thread

Shutter speed, ISO, Aperture settings

ISO 800, aperture 2.8 and I believe the shutter speed was 1/250 (can't remember)

Shutter speed was a tad high, 1/100 or a touch higher probably would have done the trick nicely. Maybe a bit more contrast in post, but all in all the sample itself looks ok. To hard to get much more than that from such a small sample though

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk

 

[weepete]

Hmm looks like a combination of thin depth of field and processing. It kinda looks like you underexposed the girl and brought it back up in post. I'm also wondering how you procesed this as the splotchyness looks to me a bit like overcompensation in the sharpness module for the thin DOF

 

[OGsPhotography]

Add some lights, experiment with SS, A, and ISO a bit nore with the nifty 50. I think your photo is nice. Cropped very wide for my taste but Im working on that!

I think you will be very happy with a few speedlights or a studio monolight. Or face the child into a window. I try to keep the ISO lowest i.e 100-200 and SS very fast for shooting children. Stop down to 5.6 or so.

I usually shoot @ 50mm also, although I am experimenting with longer lenses ( 135mm). Hard tonfind enough room indoors at my place.

DOF at 50mm really depends a lit on how closethe camera is: at 6 feet you have 5.5"( look at the pics I posted); screen shots of my depth of field calculator

At 10 feet you get Almost a foot and a half!

Looks to me you were 15'+ with that composition?

 

[DandL]

I'm a beginner shooting with a Nikon D3200. Currently I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a 50mm 1.8. I'm looking for another lens that will allow me to photograph toddlers and children and produce sharp photos. I have done several cake smash and portraits in a home studio setup of toddlers with my 50mm and although they look great, they are just not at the level of sharpness that I'm looking for. Should I be thinking of a different lens? Or a different body? I was using a tripod and 2 soft box lights. Any advice on a lens to look in to? Would like to keep it under $1000. Thank you.

Here's one I took with a Nikon D7100 and 50mm 1.8. This was shot at f/8, ISO 100, shutter speed 1/125, 2 strobes and hand held. Next time, try these settings and see if you're happy with the sharpness. Also, you said you tried ISO 400 but that was too dark. Did you try more light output from your soft boxes?

I don't think spending more money on different lenses will accomplish the sharpness you're looking for.

 

[OGsPhotography]

And increase Shutter speed if the kids move a lot, at 100-150 you may still get some motion blur.

 

[abee]

I'm a beginner shooting with a Nikon D3200. Currently I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a 50mm 1.8. I'm looking for another lens that will allow me to photograph toddlers and children and produce sharp photos. I have done several cake smash and portraits in a home studio setup of toddlers with my 50mm and although they look great, they are just not at the level of sharpness that I'm looking for. Should I be thinking of a different lens? Or a different body? I was using a tripod and 2 soft box lights. Any advice on a lens to look in to? Would like to keep it under $1000. Thank you.

Here's one I took with a Nikon D7100 and 50mm 1.8. This was shot at f/8, ISO 100, shutter speed 1/125, 2 strobes and hand held. Next time, try these settings and see if you're happy with the sharpness. Also, you said you tried ISO 400 but that was too dark. Did you try more light output from your soft boxes?

I don't think spending more money on different lenses will accomplish the sharpness you're looking for.
View attachment 118296 View attachment 118296

This is exactly what I'm going for. Look how sharp the photo is! What am I doing wrong? I had 2 soft box lights and the windows open. I used the same lens. Do I need to upgrade my camera body? Do I need stronger lights in the soft box? I am just not sure where I am going wrong!

 

[abee]

Thanks to all for your advice. I think my main issue is lighting and not the lens. Maybe I will look into better lights.

Now here is a question. Now that you see what I'm interested in shooting, which lens do you recommend I start saving up for?

 

[cherylynne1]

I'm not sure we completely nailed down your problem yet. There were a few questions that haven't been answered.

Can you upload a full resolution version of this photo? Robbins.photo is right, what I'm seeing as grain might just be from zooming in on too small of a photo.

When you sent the photo to the printer, did you send the full res photo, or this one?

Did you bump up the exposure in post processing?

Have you tried another photo with a lower ISO to see if it comes out sharp enough for your liking?

As far as recommending another lens, that's somewhat tricky. What you have now is excellent for what you're doing. I personally love my 35 1.8 as an everyday lens, and use the 50 1.8 for "formal" portraits like this one. I've also been getting quite a bit of use out of the 55-210 kit lens at places like the park or the zoo. If I could, I'd love to replace it with a 70-200/2.8. I'd also love an 85/1.4 and/or 135/2 for portraits. But that's just a personal wish list based on my preferences, and I'm also in a different system (Sony.)

I think lighting is definitely the best thing to focus on right now. If you are particularly sensitive to grain, then after lighting the next thing you might want to look into upgrading the camera. The d7200 is excellent...if I had to buy into another system, that's probably the camera I'd want.

You could also go to full frame if you want a drastic change. That would require upgrading all your lenses as well and recalculating needed focal lengths, but some people are only happy with full frame. There's nothing wrong with that.

 

[DandL]

I'm a beginner shooting with a Nikon D3200. Currently I have the kit 18-55mm lens and a 50mm 1.8. I'm looking for another lens that will allow me to photograph toddlers and children and produce sharp photos. I have done several cake smash and portraits in a home studio setup of toddlers with my 50mm and although they look great, they are just not at the level of sharpness that I'm looking for. Should I be thinking of a different lens? Or a different body? I was using a tripod and 2 soft box lights. Any advice on a lens to look in to? Would like to keep it under $1000. Thank you.

Here's one I took with a Nikon D7100 and 50mm 1.8. This was shot at f/8, ISO 100, shutter speed 1/125, 2 strobes and hand held. Next time, try these settings and see if you're happy with the sharpness. Also, you said you tried ISO 400 but that was too dark. Did you try more light output from your soft boxes?

I don't think spending more money on different lenses will accomplish the sharpness you're looking for.
View attachment 118296 View attachment 118296

This is exactly what I'm going for. Look how sharp the photo is! What am I doing wrong? I had 2 soft box lights and the windows open. I used the same lens. Do I need to upgrade my camera body? Do I need stronger lights in the soft box? I am just not sure where I am going wrong!

There is nothing wrong with your camera body nor your lens. Both are capable of producing images like the one I posted. I don't know what you're using for lighting, but I would suspect that to be the cause of your dissatisfaction. I use two of these Paul C. Buff - Einstein E640 with bounce umbrellas.
Here is another photograph I did with the D7100, 50mm 1.8. This was shot at f/7.1, ISO 100, shutter speed 1/250.
The Einsteins are pricey, but without good light, it's hard to make good images.

 

[DandL]

Thanks to all for your advice. I think my main issue is lighting and not the lens. Maybe I will look into better lights.

Now here is a question. Now that you see what I'm interested in shooting, which lens do you recommend I start saving up for?

I'd recommend saving up for better lighting. My studio isn't very large, so I mainly use the 50mm 1.8. My 70-200mm 2.8 is almost too much for my studio, and I don't have $2500 to spend on the 24-70mm 2.8, so for now, it's the 50mm that gets used most. Your camera body and 50mm lens will serve you well if you improve your lighting...

 

[budget cruncher]

I printed the photo and it's just not as crisp as I would like

Almost any photo will need sharpening before printing. They will look good on the computer without sharpening, but for printing you need to do a final sharpening.