Prime lens choices - 50mm or 35mm?

ShoeQueen

ShoeQueen

Messages
2,370
Name
Lynn
Edit My Images
No
Hopefully getting a D90 in the next week or so, with the 18-105 kit lens.

I also would like to get a prime for portrait and low light shots. I've been using a borrowed D90 for the past month and have also had a loan of a 50mm 1.4 D (but its owner needs it back tomorrow!)

Still a bit confused about lenses though so wondered...

Is the difference between 1.4 and 1.8 noticeable enough to justify the price difference?

50mm 1.8 D - £107
50mm 1.4 D - £229

What is the difference between the D and the G lens?

50mm 1.4 G - £289

I'm thinking of 50mm as that's what I've been using - but would 35mm be better?

35mm 1.8 G - £159

(Jessops prices for comparison, but I'd probably keep an eye on for sale section here :) )
 
A good few years back it was worth always going for 1.4 or whatever - so much easier to focus, more useable in low light etc. My 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 zeiss lenses were by far the most used on my contax.

Now you have useable ISO's up to 1600 and above, autofocus etc, the above deoesnt apply nearly so much so the main advantage you will see is the short depth of field which is obviously nice but probably not worth the extra - on your example above you could almost get the 35 and 50/1.8 for the cost of the 50/1.4 which would probably offer more advantages.


The main reason for the price difference in the two Nikon 50/1.4#s is that 50, the 50 1.4G is newer and has built in focus motor (so compat with the cheaper nikon bodies).
 
Last edited:
Get the 50mm 1.8 and the 35mm. The images from the fifty are very good indeed. Unless you need the shallow DOF at 1.4 get two lenses for the price of one.
 
I recently bought the 35mm f1.8G for my D5000 and the focal length is a lot more useful to me than a 50mm. Great lens, nice and sharp!

Image example: Single image photomatix HDR:
 
tim_uk said:
The main reason for the price difference in the two Nikon 50/1.4#s is that 50, the 50 1.4G is newer and has built in focus motor (so compat with the cheaper nikon bodies).
Click to expand...
Thanks - getting the D90 so I'll have the in camera focus motor.

tim_uk said:
Now you have useable ISO's up to 1600 and above, autofocus etc, the above deoesnt apply nearly so much so the main advantage you will see is the short depth of field which is obviously nice but probably not worth the extra - on your example above you could almost get the 35 and 50/1.8 for the cost of the 50/1.4 which would probably offer more advantages.
Click to expand...

trevorbray said:
Get the 50mm 1.8 and the 35mm. The images from the fifty are very good indeed. Unless you need the shallow DOF at 1.4 get two lenses for the price of one.
Click to expand...
Excellent point that I could get both!
 
AndyWest said:
I recently bought the 35mm f1.8G for my D5000 and the focal length is a lot more useful to me than a 50mm. Great lens, nice and sharp!
Click to expand...
I know a couple of people at camera club who have that lens on their D5000 and they really like it - it a useful focal length.
 
Last edited:
vote for the 35mm AF-S from me, I found it more useful than the 50mm
 
I bought the 35mm 1.8 first. Then bought a 50mm 1.4 (and sent it back).
Then bought a 85mm 1.8.

15mm difference just aint worth it - go 85mm instead and get 2 really good/useful lenses.

Taken with my 85mm on Weds (my newborn boy):

2b1661.jpg
 
Last edited:
I shoot Canon and I haven't managed to find any use for a 50mm on a crop camera yet (I don't take portraits). 30 - 35mm works well. I doubt if you'll find much difference between f1.4 and f1.8 in practice now, and don't overlook f2.0.
 
Boldonian said:
On a crop body I'd go 35 F1.8 anyday .Great cheap lens.
Click to expand...

true...but..."I also would like to get a prime for portrait "

a 50 and certainly a 35 is too close to the subject surely..........:thinking:

A "portrait' lens on film was about 100mm IIRC so choose 85mm on a D90 ? as per Davids above
 
Last edited:
On a D90, I would go for the 35mm. I had a 50mm but with the crop on the sensor, I preferred the 35mm as it was closer to a full frame 50mm.
 
Yardbent said:
A "portrait' lens on film was about 100mm IIRC so choose 85mm on a D90 ? as per Davis above
Click to expand...
I would say that depends on what you would like to do and how much space you've got. The longer the focal length the more the perspective separates background and subject.
 
I think that the 35mm will be more versatile, the 50mm is great but better for portraits.
 
Cistron said:
I would say that depends on what you would like to do and how much space you've got. The longer the focal length the more the perspective separates background and subject.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cistron said:
I would say that depends on what you would like to do and how much space you've got. The longer the focal length the more the perspective separates background and subject.
Click to expand...

It may well be that I have misunderstood your wording, but with longer focal length comes perspective compression - the background appears closer to the foreground. With a shorter focal length, something that is mere feet away can appear a lot further. This is how a dolly zoom works, by zooming the focal length as you change camera to subject distance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_zoom

Goodfellas_Dolly_Zoom.gif


With a longer focal length though, out of focus backgrounds are more exaggerated, so an f/4 lens at 200mm is obviously going to give an f/2.8 at a shorter focal length a run for its money.
 
Last edited:
Would it be too simplistic to say 35mm for a cropped sensor, and 50mm for FF?
 
35mm and 50mm are fine for getting in close or in the case of the 35mm full body at under 3 metres, 50mm full body at over 3 metres, upper body under 3 metres.

On a crop my preference would be for the 85mm, head and shoulders at 3 metres and it can throw the background out with a nice creamy bokeh.

Back in film days I tended to use either 90mm or 135mm for portraits, I certainly wouldn't be looking at under 85mm on a FF or FX sensor to do the job.

Would it be too simplistic to say 35mm for a cropped sensor, and 50mm for FF?
Click to expand...

If you have under 2 metres between you and your subject yes, if you can get 2 metres or more then no, 50mm on a crop and 85mm on FF
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top