Nikon 28mm f1.8G or Nikon 35mm 1.8G FX

badboy1984

badboy1984

Messages
2,529
Edit My Images
No
I wanted to add another prime to my arsenal. I already got the 50mm f1.8G and 85mm 1.4D. Which of the two would be more useful when using it on a FF body as a walkaround lens.

They both similar price. I'm tempting for the 28mm actually.
 
I have the 28, 50 and 85 1.8G which I find covers things nicely. In fact I use them most pretty much in that order. That said, if I was to only have one lens it would be a 35mm. Sorry to be no help!
 
The thing is when I go out on holiday I prefer to shoot with something lighter. I do have the nikon 28-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 but both of those lens I would prefer not to take out. When I do sports stuff I use them because the lens will be shooting all day rather then hanging around in my hands.

50mm and the 85mm will be something i will take on holiday, I just need another prime to go along with that. I think I will go for the 28mm because it can cover some landscape as well.
 
If you already have the 50 and 85, I'd go with the 28. I had the 35 and 85, when I wanted something in the middle, I ended up getting the 60 2.8 macro. 35-60-85 was a nice even spread.
 
I chose the 28mm as I already had a 50mm and 85mm.

Regretted it as I preferred the 35mm focal length. Sold the 28mm and 50mm and replaced both with the 35mm sigma 1.4.

The 28mm was awesome optically, I just found the focal length abit too wide for a lot of stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top