New lens or flash

Claudio17177

Claudio17177

Messages
280
Name
Claudio
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,
obviously budget is always the limiting factor, I am looking to expand my kit (and I have already posted yesterday regarding what lens to buy) so the main question here is what to buy first as I am shooting more portraits and often inside. So I cant decide between buying a flash and keep shooting with my 18/55mm or delay the flash and buy a 35mm 1.8 or even better 50mm 1.4. I like so much the depth of field of the lens mentioned and at the same time i thought it could enabled me to shoot in dim light without using artificial light. Any suggestion?
 
Its obviously good to have both a flash and a good lens. Having recently bought both myself I find I get more from a good lens, although there are a few times where the flash has been invaluable.

My opinion would be lens then flash, but thats only my opinion.
 
If you're prepared to spend £300 or so on a 50mm 1.4, why not go for the 35mm 1.8 AND something like a Nissin flash. Should cost about the same.
 
gad-westy said:
If you're prepared to spend £300 or so on a 50mm 1.4, why not go for the 35mm 1.8 AND something like a Nissin flash. Should cost about the same.
Click to expand...
I mentioned 1.4 but i dont think i could spend that much, i think i d rather go for a 35mm 1.8 you can get it for about £170.00, do flash have to be branded or could you achieve good results with an unbraded one?
 
It all depends on what you shoot most often.

If as you say you are doing portraits and the lighting inside is reasonable then go for the either the 35mm or the 50mm for shallow DOF

My own low-light pictures are either museum or church interiors (static) where the VR on my zoom takes care of things, or party candids where the light is so low that I need flash. I have had much more use out of my SB600 than the fast primes.

I think the Nissin flash (Nikon version) does what Nikon's own ones do for a much cheaper price. Google will give you details.
 
Last edited:
My suggestion would be 35mm first followed by a nikon flash like the SB 600 second hand.
 
thank you guys, you are all confirming what my initial thoughts were
 
why don't you get SB400 2nd hand - very small and handy flash - New £110 and 2nd hand you can get for £70.
 
I was in a similar boat about a year ago. It was either Sb400 or 35 1.8. I went Sb400 because I figured I could use it for all of my lenses. I now own the 35 1.8 also. I guess you could argue that the 35 1.8 can be used for more than just low light and you'd be right. It is a nice walkaround prime. The AF is pretty quick and the DoF isolation is something you can't get on the kit lens.

I don't think you'll go wrong either way.

Thanks,
Rick
 
casts_by_fly said:
I was in a similar boat about a year ago. It was either Sb400 or 35 1.8. I went Sb400 because I figured I could use it for all of my lenses. I now own the 35 1.8 also. I guess you could argue that the 35 1.8 can be used for more than just low light and you'd be right. It is a nice walkaround prime. The AF is pretty quick and the DoF isolation is something you can't get on the kit lens.

I don't think you'll go wrong either way.

Thanks,
Rick
Click to expand...

Hi Rick, I thought about the sb400 as first choice, but after that I thought maybe I should invest in a sb600, as I have a d3000 (nice start) and I am already feeling like i should upgrade shortly so i would like avoiding to upgrade flash as well, although listening to what you are saying I might be happy with sb400
 
I've got both SB400 and SB600. Sb600 is quite big as compared to SB400 and takes up 4 AA batteries as compared to SB400 which takes 2 AA batteries.

I had sb400 for my D40 but when I upgraded to D90 I went for SB600 for its wireless capabilities. I still like sb400 for its small size and ease of use (no settings buttons on it - so stick on camera and off you go). The only prob with sb400 you may find is that when you take picture in portrait mode then you can't bounce flash off ceiling as it rotates only in 1 direction. But again you can overcome this prob by buying a horse-shoe lead and then hold the flash in other hand!;)
Hope this helps :thumbs:
 
pm79 said:
I've got both SB400 and SB600. Sb600 is quite big as compared to SB400 and takes up 4 AA batteries as compared to SB400 which takes 2 AA batteries.

I had sb400 for my D40 but when I upgraded to D90 I went for SB600 for its wireless capabilities. I still like sb400 for its small size and ease of use (no settings buttons on it - so stick on camera and off you go). The only prob with sb400 you may find is that when you take picture in portrait mode then you can't bounce flash off ceiling as it rotates only in 1 direction. But again you can overcome this prob by buying a horse-shoe lead and then hold the flash in other hand!;)
Hope this helps :thumbs:
Click to expand...


Exactly what he said. On the D40 it was great, especially with the 35 1.8. I like that it is small and portable easily. You clip it on and flip the switch to on and you're done. Everything in in camera, so once you get used to that you're golden.

Now that I have the D90 I still like all of the above, but I do miss not being able to rotate it when in portrait mode. For as many shots as I need in portrait with bounced flash, I'll deal with it.

For an outdoor fill flash it works great and I love it combined with the 55-200 for that purpose.

Thanks,
Rick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top