| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/04/2014 08:13:07 AM · #1 |
I've been deciding for a long while now which lens to get 85, 50 or 35. The 85 has proven too long for the use I want to squeeze out of the lens, so it's been between the 35 and the 50 (all 1.8G Nikkor). The 85 is certainly a beauty, but in addition to being a bit too long, it's also twice the price of the other two.
So the shop near to where I live (who have very well priced equipment) got stock of both the 35 and the 50 recently so I decided to give them a shot. Both are fantastic! On closer inspection of my test shots, the 50 just had that edge. But the 35 was fantastic to shoot with. I decided to go with the 35 and I decided to buy the lens now before the ZAR sinks further. Then I remembered that I want to also take portraits with my new lens. 35 is just too wide for this, so I did a final test with both today before buying. Yes, the 50 is certainly a few notches up on the 35. The CA on the 35 is quite heavy. And the 50 isolates the subject beautifully. So I say welcome to my new 50mm 1.8G! |
|
|
|
02/04/2014 10:13:50 AM · #2 |
I take a less scientific approach.
I click the (Equipment) button in the upper right hand corner of the front page.
Then I click (lenses).
Then I see how many people own each lens.
In this case 496 more people own the 50 than the 35.
So the 50 wins. |
|
|
|
02/04/2014 10:46:27 AM · #3 |
i prefer a 35/85/135 for my shooting with primes on a FF
on a crop a 50 and 100 will give you the preferred portrait equivalent focal lengths on a crop. you will get better background compression with an 85 for portraits but it will be like shooting with a 135mm on a ff in which you need to stand far away form you subject for anything more than a headshot.
i used a 50mm on a ff and crop and it worked well.
|
|
|
|
02/04/2014 12:19:27 PM · #4 |
| It really depends what you want to do. On a crop, using a 50 is closer to an 85mm on full frame than it is the FoV from a 50 on FF, so if you want to replicate that FoV go with the 35mm nikon or 30mm 1.4 from sigma, which is very, very good. But, if you're going for more subject isolation and will be shooting strictly portraits, the 50 is probably a better choice, if not the 85 if you can get the space to shoot with it. Hopefully they improved the build quality of the 50 1.8G, as the 1.8D has build quality to match its price. Both the 50 and the 85 pair pretty well with extension tubes to double as a macro lens, so there's that option as well. |
|
|
|
02/04/2014 03:32:17 PM · #5 |
nygold - yes, that's true. It may also have something to do with the fact that the 35mm is a DX lens.
Mike - I agree. Thing with equivalent focal length is that it doesn't quite work like that. Sure you get the same field of view on a 50 on DX as a 75 on FX, but the distortion, bokeh and magnification don't scale with FoV.
spiritualspatula - the build quality of the 1.8G is quite good. The image quality is superior to the 1.8D, that I know for sure. I did some test shots with the 1.8D too.
I've done a few photos now with this lens. It is so sharp. And the contrast and colour are so good. It really does put my kit lenses to shame (although I must say I am impressed with them, especially the 55-200). And so far the FoV of the 50 is perfect for me, so I'm super happy. :) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/06/2025 06:03:01 PM EDT.
