Canon 40D or 450D for Baby Pictures?


Status
Not open for further replies.

jadefox

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
21
0
0
#1
Hi all!

I'm seriously considering upgrading from my PnS (Panasonic Lumix FX8) to a dSLR. The main reason is to take pictures of my son (who is starting to walk/run/fall down ;)) both indoors and outdoors. The pictures from my PnS is getting increasingly blurry/noisy or else he's out of the frame significantly.

I've narrowed my choices down to a Canon 40D or a 450D. From what I've read so far, the IQ of both Canons are comparable, with the main difference in the speed of the AF and the cross AF sensors of the 40D. My question is would the difference in burst mode and AF speeds seriously affect my intended subject?

Another enticing candidate is the Nikon D300 but that is unfortunately out of budget... :bsmilie:

Thanks for reading.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#2
Hi all!

I'm seriously considering upgrading from my PnS (Panasonic Lumix FX8) to a dSLR. The main reason is to take pictures of my son (who is starting to walk/run/fall down ;)) both indoors and outdoors. The pictures from my PnS is getting increasingly blurry/noisy or else he's out of the frame significantly.

I've narrowed my choices down to a Canon 40D or a 450D. From what I've read so far, the IQ of both Canons are comparable, with the main difference in the speed of the AF and the cross AF sensors of the 40D. My question is would the difference in burst mode and AF speeds seriously affect my intended subject?

Another enticing candidate is the Nikon D300 but that is unfortunately out of budget... :bsmilie:

Thanks for reading.
I'm still having problems shooting my 9mth old baby using D300.. it's already much better than D70s, D200 but IMO still not fast enough in the AF department. ;p It's ok if you try to predict focus and lock first. DSLRs low shutter lag will guarantee you get the framing but doesn't guarantee than your baby will be tack sharp. :) So I guess either of your choice would be good. In fact I wanted to get a D40X or D60 for my wife because her P4 is not fast enough anymore, but she doesn't want me to spend more money..
 

Jun 19, 2007
972
0
0
northeast
#3
450D is not yet out yet. try to get something better like 40D(6.5fps) or even mark 2(8.5fps).
40D is good as it focus reasonably fast.

for taking baby portraits, what you might need is a 40D+ 24-70L and a 430ex or 580ex II
this should be sufficient , if you're on tight budget you might even want to consider a 50 f1.8.
which is a reasonably good and light weight lens.
 

flipfreak

Senior Member
Nov 26, 2007
7,030
0
36
Singapore
www.rogerchua.com
#4
Hi all!

I'm seriously considering upgrading from my PnS (Panasonic Lumix FX8) to a dSLR. The main reason is to take pictures of my son (who is starting to walk/run/fall down ;)) both indoors and outdoors. The pictures from my PnS is getting increasingly blurry/noisy or else he's out of the frame significantly.

I've narrowed my choices down to a Canon 40D or a 450D. From what I've read so far, the IQ of both Canons are comparable, with the main difference in the speed of the AF and the cross AF sensors of the 40D. My question is would the difference in burst mode and AF speeds seriously affect my intended subject?

Another enticing candidate is the Nikon D300 but that is unfortunately out of budget... :bsmilie:

Thanks for reading.

get the 40D. the cross sensors and 6.5fps will come in useful.
 

coolsigg

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
2,473
0
0
#5
Hi all!

I'm seriously considering upgrading from my PnS (Panasonic Lumix FX8) to a dSLR. The main reason is to take pictures of my son (who is starting to walk/run/fall down ;)) both indoors and outdoors. The pictures from my PnS is getting increasingly blurry/noisy or else he's out of the frame significantly.

I've narrowed my choices down to a Canon 40D or a 450D. From what I've read so far, the IQ of both Canons are comparable, with the main difference in the speed of the AF and the cross AF sensors of the 40D. My question is would the difference in burst mode and AF speeds seriously affect my intended subject?

Another enticing candidate is the Nikon D300 but that is unfortunately out of budget... :bsmilie:

Thanks for reading.
i wld recommend to get the 40D now cos 450D might not be out so soon (earliest by IT show next week??). babies look different every week (at least to me =)) so having a good DSLR on hand to capture their each n every moment is priceless! :D
 

bomby929

Senior Member
Feb 18, 2008
595
0
16
#6
IMHO.. its not about the camera body.. but the lens u use. A fast lens will allow u to shoot at a high speed and about focus.. I guess u have to predict the bady movement.

And I agree.. baby gow up very very fast.. my 3 month old is so different from her new born pictures.. so better capture them fast..
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#7
Best to get a faster lens, really. The 40D is not all that much an improvement over the 400D in terms of focus lock.
 

KangS

New Member
Sep 15, 2005
1,115
0
0
#8
In low light to normal indoor conditions, the 40D seems to be able to achieve AF lock significantly better than 400D. At least with the same 50mm f1.4.

I would suggest getting the 40D coupled with a very fast prime such as the 50mm f1.4 or the Sigma 30mm f1.4 . Push the ISO up to 800 (which the 40D handles pretty well )and shoot at about f1.8 and f2.0. In most cases, you should get a pretty fast shutter speed of about 1/100 or so. If you have noise reduction software such as Noise Ninja, the noise is practically gone after applying that.

You'll get pretty good results with such a combo. :thumbsup:
 

khtee

New Member
Dec 18, 2007
226
0
0
#9
F2.8 lens should do the trick.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#10
F2.8 lens should do the trick.
Should be able to use flash on a baby who's already learning to walk. f/2.8 is good to have but I prefer to stop down to f/4 to get better DoF and upping the ISO so that the flash need not be so strong (I bounce the flash also). Baby's movement at this age is very erratic and if he's the mischievious type he'll suddenly move towards you and you'll lose focus. ;p I already feel that D300's focusing is already very fast but still not enough for an active baby.
 

MarkTan89

New Member
Jun 30, 2007
591
0
0
Boon Keng
#12
IMO, I don't think your child will be running that quickly that you would need 6.5 fps lol :) I think if you don't wanna spend that much, the 450D would be good enough, 3.5fps should more than suffice for shooting children (sounds wrong). :bsmilie:
 

seanray

New Member
Apr 28, 2007
36
0
0
#14
Hi all,

I am also keen to take pictures of my baby till he take his first step, first swim and many first!

Pardon me for jumping into this thread but i advice in this area.
My concern is 3fps good enough to capture babies & kids throughout their growing stage.

I am shortlisting my DSLR purchase to
1) 400D
2) 450D (if it is release before end Mar)
3) D40x
4) D60
5) D80

Please advice on the DSLR in the list and lens required.
I have understands Nikon D40x and D60's limitation in the lens.

Cheers,
Ray
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#15
Hi all,

I am also keen to take pictures of my baby till he take his first step, first swim and many first!

Pardon me for jumping into this thread but i advice in this area.
My concern is 3fps good enough to capture babies & kids throughout their growing stage.

I am shortlisting my DSLR purchase to
1) 400D
2) 450D (if it is release before end Mar)
3) D40x
4) D60
5) D80

Please advice on the DSLR in the list and lens required.
I have understands Nikon D40x and D60's limitation in the lens.

Cheers,
Ray
3fps is more than good enough.. I shoot on single mode. The camera just needs to respond immediately at the decisive moment when I release the shutter. If you want to shoot continuous, I think investing in a HD video camera might be a better deal.
 

ortega

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 2, 2004
23,694
10
38
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
#16
what is needed is

good high iso noise control
low or no shutter lag
good auto everything images
good fast lens with macro capability
a flash with a bounce head

fps - doesn't really matter unless you are shooting sports
 

Headshotzx

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2007
5,841
0
36
25
Punggol
#17
A Canon 400D + 50mm f/1.8 will be the cheapest way to go.
A Canon 40D + 24-70mm f/2.8L USM + 430EX / 580EXII Flash is the most expensive yet best way to go.
A Canon 40D + 50mm f/1.4 + 430EX / 580EXII flash is the most bang for buck option.

Basically, like what oretaga said, you'll need a fast lens (I'm not sure about macro / semi-macro capability tho, why'd you say that Oretaga?), good ISO handling, and a flash.

A fast lens would mean f/2.8 and wider (f/2, f/1.8, f/1.4 etc). Prime lenses will be great if you want the best quality and stuff, so the 50mm f/1.4 will be great.

Good ISO handling is the camera's part, and the 40D will *probably* have better noise control than 450D. This is a common trend between double digit xxD series and triple digit xxxD series canon bodies.

A flash with bounce will help you a lot. Bounced light will light up your baby and the area around your baby (assuming that your ceiling is quite high / your wall is far away and your baby is on the floor). The flash will give you AF-Assist beaming, which means your auto-focus will be better / more spot-on. This will be the deciding factor of good/bad shots taken under low light / quick moving of your baby.

Better AF-handling coupled with the AF-assist from the flash will mean that your autofocus will perform very well. This is a key point of the 40D.

The 6.5fps 40D vs 3fps 400D / 450D isn't that much an issue here. Your baby won't be running in track sports or driving cars very soon, so it won't actually matter.

I'd definitely suggest the Canon 40D + Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM + Canon Speedlite 430EX flash for baby-shooting. Of course, you wouldn't buy that great a camera to just take shots of your baby right? That's why in the long run, the 40D will be more useful to you than the 450D if you have the right lens choices.

The above will put you back by ~S$2900 if bought new. Of course, if you buy from the same shop, you'll probably have more freebies thrown in and better bargains if you buy upfront as a set.

All in all, a flash and fast lens is essential to child photography. Get what you can afford now if you can.

Hope this helps =)

EDIT: I didn't include the 450D as an option as waiting for the 450D to arrive in stores would mean missing a lot of once-in-a-lifetime baby shots. That's definitely not what you want. If you plan to use the dslr to get great shots of your baby, the time to buy is now =) 40D prices won't be falling anytime soon, lens /accessory prices never fall that drastically, and your baby's growing up just as you are reading this message.
 

#18
3fps is more than good enough.. I shoot on single mode. The camera just needs to respond immediately at the decisive moment when I release the shutter. If you want to shoot continuous, I think investing in a HD video camera might be a better deal.
yeah high-def video the way to go! :thumbsup:
 

jadefox

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
21
0
0
#19
Thanks for all the inputs!

I will probably go the route of getting a 40D + Prime (1.4/1.8) at the start. A Speedlite will come when I can next afford it.

Since the 450D is using the same DigicIII processor, I was wondering if the noise handling would be similar to the 40D? In any case, the noise can't be worse than my current PnS. :bsmilie:

Much as I would love the quality and flexibility of a 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, that (and any other L lens such as the EF 50mm f/1.2L USM) would probably never get an approval from my financial controller. :bheart:

The main use of the fps is a carry over from my PnS. I usually shoot a series of photos when my son is in motion and hopefully 1 of them will be a keeper (although it is usually none). I'll admit the problem probably lies behind the viewfinder (LCD in this case). :embrass:

Frankly, I was thinking of waiting for the IT Fair. As I'm starting from scratch, some of the freebies may come in useful. :sweat: Personally, I find that visual changes in my son within a week is usually quite slight. Ability is a different kettle of fish altogether! He went from crawling to walking/falling down within a few days! Will continue to depend on my trusty Panasonic until then (for blurry, noisy and priceless memories). :bsmilie:
 

jadefox

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
21
0
0
#20
Hi seanray!

No worries. I'm also here to learn.

I have also seriously considered the D40/X, D60 which are also very capable in reviews (dpreview, kenrockwell). They have the added benefit of being cheaper as well. The main obstacle for me is the lack of AF-S primes for them. The choice between a D80 and a Canon was decided in my case due to the presence of a Canon enthusiast friend that I can consult/borrow lenses/buy-2nd-hand from. :embrass:

If you have no such considerations, it might come down to getting a feel for your different options by handling them and choosing you that which you feel most comfortable with.

Just my $0.02.

Cheers to taking photos of first-everythings! :bsmilie:

Hi all,

I am also keen to take pictures of my baby till he take his first step, first swim and many first!

Pardon me for jumping into this thread but i advice in this area.
My concern is 3fps good enough to capture babies & kids throughout their growing stage.

I am shortlisting my DSLR purchase to
1) 400D
2) 450D (if it is release before end Mar)
3) D40x
4) D60
5) D80

Please advice on the DSLR in the list and lens required.
I have understands Nikon D40x and D60's limitation in the lens.

Cheers,
Ray
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom