Nikon 50mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8

[Dan_1981]

I know both of these are meant to be pretty good but which would people opt for?

I need the AF-S version as I have the D5000.

Will be mainly used for some travelling we're doing over the summer along with general people shots.

Only other lens I have is the 18-55 kit lens.

Do these crop up on ebay even cheaper than in store? Jessops currently have the 35mm at £160 and the 50mm at £180 - i've not looked any further yet.

[ian in lancs]

on a crop camera the 35 would give a view similar to our eyes. The 50 would be more like a portrait lens. For travel maybe the 35 but you have that already in your zoom range. Any low light advantage of the wider aperture will be negated by softer focus wide open. You'll get sharper results in low light increasing the ISO a stop or two. The only advantage you'll get is narrow depth of field with the wider aperture.

[daveskerr82]

Good question, i've been asking myself exactly the same question for my D3100.

I've currently got the 18-55 kit and 55-200 vr

Thanks

David

[K12beano]

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G
AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G


On DX format, 35mm nearer to "normal" field of view, 50mm a touch long.

35mm for travel and "reportage", groups of people. 50mm a little nearer a "portrait" field of view.

50mm slightly better for getting limited depth of field shots - more artiness and isolating foreground objects.

35mm takes 52mm filters, 50mm takes 58mm filters and the one to go for if you are ever thinking of going to go FX and want to plan with that in mind. However, there's always a Fleabay market for Nikkors.

Both are supplied with lens hoods - make sure you use!


I would expect/believe, but haven't tested, that edge to edge on a 50mm on DX would be truly stunning opened right up - very useable (apart from narrow depth of field) right to its limits. 35mm a slight compromise and better stopped a tad. 35mm comes in a bit smaller than it would otherwise need to be because it has a smaller image circle for DX, but neither is by any means bulky. Neither have an aperture ring - but I guess you're not bothered (neither would be useable on extension tubes, though, if you ever wanted to go close-up/macro).

Two extremely capable, backed by years of design experience and latest coatings. Great value for money.


I reckon, IMHO, it comes down only to the angle of view that you want. Go for one of the reputable sellers (not worth haggling for a risky supplier) and check out http://camerapricebuster.com/cat_Nikon_SLR_Lenses....

[Dan_1981]

Thanks so far guys....... do I need one?

Am i going to see noticble differences to using my kit lens I guess is the question?

We're heading to Morroco so i'm hoping for lots of bright colours, but also lots of bright light so plenty of shade and contrast.

[K12beano]

Dan_1981 said:

.... do I need one?

"Need"??? Define "need"!





Of course you do.



If nothing else, sticking a prime on and roaming the world is a fantastic compositional motivator to explore a scene. No longer can you zoom in and out, you have to walk, look, bend, stretch, walk and look....


JFDI!

[Gad-Westy]

Dan_1981 said:

Thanks so far guys....... do I need one?

Am i going to see noticble differences to using my kit lens I guess is the question?

We're heading to Morroco so i'm hoping for lots of bright colours, but also lots of bright light so plenty of shade and contrast.

You certainly will notice the difference. I had a 35mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 when I was on a DX and I think generally the 35mm is a more useful length (though the 50mm is good for head and shoulders type shots.

Contrary to some opinions I found the 35mm quite sharp wide open (certainly a lot sharper than the kit lens wide open) and it just gets better from there. In low light it is leagues ahead of the 18-55. The 18-55's max aperture at 35mm is f/5 so the 35mm 1.8 is getting on for 3 stops faster. That's a pretty big difference!

So to summarise I'd go for the 35mm but I'd definitely take the kit lens too for wider stuff.

One last thing. Spend a couple of days only using your kit lens at 35mm and then at 50mm and just see which length you prefer.

[ian in lancs]

I also think 35mm. And no in the 'hierarchy of needs' I dont remember seeing lenses anywhere... lol

[Celtic Dragon]

I have the 50mm F1.8. I know I have a few pics lying round in digital format of it in use with an F5. If I can find them would you like to put 1 up to see what its like?

[Dan_1981]

Yup always happy to see comparisons & exmaples!

[nonuts]

This was taken in Morocco a few weeks ago with the 35mm 1.8 DX, some of the others in that set are too:


Morocco-49 by no-nuts, on Flickr

The lens only came off my camera for the wide angle (10-20mm), the 35mm is the best buy I've ever made camera wise. It also makes you think more about the shots you're taking from my experience.

[james_tigerwoods]

I agonised over this very decision myself and after trying a 50mm 1.8, decided on the 35mm as that way I can be closer to what's going on, instead of further away - I have kids so being closer to them helps.

I now have the 35mm 1.8 AF-S (from Jessops as it happens) as well as the 18-70 and 55-200. And an off camera flash - If you don't have one, consider one of these BEFORE the 35mm 1.8. But that's my own opinion.

Examples:

[Celtic Dragon]

Pretty sure these are some of the 50mm, problem is they were shot on film in the F5 on Ilford 400 hence the grain. They have blurred slightly being converted from tiff (scans) to jpegs

[Olivero]

My vote goes to the 50mm. The 1.8 is very good value for money an fine for people. Don't forget that you will be using it on a cropped sensor.

Here is a shot with a 50mm 1.8 on a D300.

[GlenMH]

You may want to have a read of this thread: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[Dan_1981]

I have had an idea -

Does the duty free dixons store in manchester airport stock lenses?

[Olivero]

Dan_1981 said:

I have had an idea -

Does the duty free dixons store in manchester airport stock lenses?

Yes it does, worth phoning to see what they have in stock.

[james_tigerwoods]

I found that Jessops was within a tenner or so of eBay or places that are duty free and at that, it made as much sense to jut get it from them.

[craigb84]

james_tigerwoods said:

I found that Jessops was within a tenner or so of eBay or places that are duty free and at that, it made as much sense to jut get it from them.

Have to agree. I've been looking for a few weeks now and can't really beat Jessops (at least not by enough to bother). I read somewhere that prices are held because of the high demand for these and distribution issues because of the earthquakes and floods and such.

I'm also going 35mm after much deliberation.

[kVA]

Dan_1981 said:

Thanks so far guys....... do I need one?

Am i going to see noticble differences to using my kit lens I guess is the question?

We're heading to Morroco so i'm hoping for lots of bright colours, but also lots of bright light so plenty of shade and contrast.

OK, so I'm going to contradict everyone else here and say NO...

If your only other lens is the kit lens, you have nothing above 55mm, right? Wouldn't it make more sense to spend the money on a telephoto? Unless you are trying to sell full colour, full page spreads in a glossy magazine, the difference in sharpness will not really be appreciated by anyone else (although, you will KNOW) and a telephoto will open up a whole new world of photography for you!

If it was me, I would trade in your kit lens for the excellent 18-200 VR Nikkor and then you've just got one lens on your camera - easy to carry on your travels, no risk of getting dust and sand on the sensor every time you want a change of perspective. I am a part-time pro, with £0000's worth of prime Nikkors in my bag, but this is what I take when I go travelling - especially somewhere sunny (where you don't need f1.8).

Anyway, that's my two-penny'th


ETA: Just realised we are talking about sub-£200 lenses here - maybe a second-hand 18-200, or a Tamron / Sigma, instead?

Edited by kVA on Tuesday 3rd April 16:03