Nikon Users

[kundalini]

I have a 50mm f/1.4 lens & 17-55 f/2.8 lens
and my budget is $2,000

The 50mm is good. I haven't used the 17-55mm, but generally with people photography, you want to extend your focal length. If you have a $2K budget, then either the 85mm f/1.4 or the 70-200mm f/2.8 would fit like a glove. TBH, the 70-200mm would be much more versatile.

 

[kundalini]

I'm wondering what f/ stop your images .

To me, that looks like .

I don't see nuthing. (Sgt. Shultz's voice)

 

[cnutco]

There you go.

 

[JenLavazza]

Looking at your example images I would suggest learning better post processing technique and developing you "eye". If you are set on upgrading though.....I HIGHLY recommend the D700! I LOVE mine! I too shoot babies/children, but using mainly natural lighting. I have never regretted spending the money on the upgrade....WELL worth it.

 

[kundalini]

There you go.

Ackkk.... baby pictures?

From the thumbnail that cnutco provided (cheers) it looks as if baby's head is the size of a watermelon and the rest is a receding grape. I don't do infants, but if I were a betting man, I'd lay a fiver on that you used your 17-55mm.... and on the wider end.

 

[Ginu]

My eye is not trained as I'm still learning, but I can say your pictures seem a little to flushed out and very little contrast since the background color is very close to the baby's skin. I would say your technique needs work for most part and learning to work with different lights might be your best bet.

For 2k I suggest a 85mm 1.4 or 1.8 and a D7000 or D90
If you feel the need for a full frame body then the D700 is your friend but keep in mind a replacement is coming so might be worth holding up on that.

 

[dexterlitonjua]

as far as i know, these cameras where tested by professional photographers and if its good enough for professionals why can't we be satisfied with it? .. im using a d80 and 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 and i find the images that my camera produce sharp enough for a print larger than 8x12.. i don't think that upgrading bodies would make your image tack sharp. in my opinion, maximizing what you have is a great option rather than upgrading it.. i bet your camera is much sharper than my camera. If i where to use that money, i'll go with a lens or an additional light. a lens that will eliminate distortion would be good for any kind of portrait. maybe a 24-70mm f2.8?(i know the 17-55mm is a crop lens and if you plan someday to upgrade to a full-frame camera, you'll find the 24-70's range very useful. then sell the 17-55mm for whatever ) well that's just my two cents

 

[cnutco]

There you go.

Ackkk.... baby pictures?

From the thumbnail that cnutco provided (cheers) it looks as if baby's head is the size of a watermelon and the rest is a receding grape. I don't do infants, but if I were a betting man, I'd lay a fiver on that you used your 17-55mm.... and on the wider end.

That is what I was thinking...

OP, stick with your D5000. It should be fine in a controled environment that your are shooting in. You need to purchase a new lens for what your are wanting to do. There have been several great suggestions about lenses already.

Good luck

 

[o hey tyler]

OP, judging based on your EXIF data, I'd be willing to guess that you're using continuous lights (I.E. Not flashes). This might have something to do with the lack of sharpness in your shots. But I wouldn't expect you to know that at this stage, and I wouldn't expect an upgrade in camera body to render better results. I'd put money into lighting, because the kit you have doesn't appear to be as "great".

 

[rateeg]

i think it's your post processing technique is the problem and not the camera.
don't rely mostly on the camera's fault when you dont get what you want.

try learning balancing the colors, adjusting exposures and contrasts.