Quick lens Question

H

HWest

Messages
1,177
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm used to a 50mm 1.8 on the Sonys I've used for work. I am now the proud owner of a Nikon d5100 and am looking for a prime lens as we have our first baby on the way and my wife has put me under orders to take lots of nice photos. I know I'll need the AF-S for the 5100 body, and I'm having to watch the pennies due to the expected arrival.

My question to you is this: should I go with the 35mm 1.8 or the 50mm 1.8? I've never used a 35mm before - what is the picture quality like? The 35mm is a bit cheaper than the 50mm - does anyone know why?
 
Which Sony body was the 50mm on? If it was a full frame camera, the 35mm would be closer to the FoV you're used to. If a crop, then the 50mm would be best.

I have both, and they certainly each have their place. I'd probably use the 35mm less if there were a 24 though.
 
I photograph kids both privately (two young stepdaughters) as well as professionally. I somehow prefer the 50mm (I have the somewhat more pricey f/1.4 AF-S), even on a crop, but if you want value for money and prefer to a bit spend less, the 35mm f/1.8 is a very good choice.

There isn't really a better or worse with regards to focal length. It's about what you are more comfortable working with. That may be either and it may not be what the next person prefers. If you are used to and happy with 50mm on a crop-sensor DSLR - go for the 50mm, if the 50mm you used at work were on a full-frame camera, then the 35mm will be a closer match.
 
Last edited:
HWest said:
A300 with a 50mm 1.8 on. Lovely, lovely glass - but there have been times I've had to climb onto a table to get far enough away to get the shot that I wanted, so I appreciate the idea of extra width with the 35mm.
Click to expand...

Yep. The 50 would give you the exact same FoV you used to have and the 35 be a bit wider. If it's mainly for the baby then a 35 seems a better choice as you can be closer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top