35 or 50?

[Pedro_lopez]

I've been looking for my first "prime" lens to compliment the 18-55 kit lens I have. My main aim is to do seascape and landscape but I've also read they have great Bokeh effect I want to practice as well. These are the only lens at the moment that are in my price range unless anyone can possibly mention something better.
So which ones a better all around better choice?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[astroNikon]

With your 18-55 do you find yourself more around the 50mm length
or the 35mm length?

The way you currently shot will impact how well you initially like the 35 v 50 lens.

This is the reason I don't have a 35mm lens. I'm either wider or longer than 35mm. Normally 18-24 or 50 or more. But I shoot FullFrame so those are actual field of view for comparison of 52 (35mm) /75 (50mm) ish on a DX camera.

 

[Pedro_lopez]

I find myself in the middle so definitely probably more the 35mm length. For landscape I've noticed zooming to much in doesn't quite get the whole picture but leaving it at the starting 18 gets too much. I've actually been leaning towards getting the 35 more but I have read good things about the "nifty fifty".


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Designer]

My main aim is to do seascape and landscape ..

For that application, and of the two choices, you will probably want the 35mm. You should realize that the wider the lens, the less background blur, just so you know.

 

[photo1x1.com]

With your 18-55 do you find yourself more around the 50mm length
or the 35mm length?

The way you currently shot will impact how well you initially like the 35 v 50 lens.

This is the reason I don't have a 35mm lens. I'm either wider or longer than 35mm. Normally 18-24 or 50 or more. But I shoot FullFrame so those are actual field of view for comparison of 52 (35mm) /75 (50mm) ish on a DX camera.

I second astroNikons opinion - 35mm for land/seascape is too long for my taste, and the 50mm will give you nice background blur.
35mm usually is not a focal length you´d go for when you want shallow depth. So you could stop down your kit lens to around f11, get pretty decent sharpness with it and probably get somewhere near the 35mm prime. What you can´t do with your kit lens is get that shallow DOF look, so I think the 50mm will add more options to your photography than the 35mm would.
Conclusion I´d go with the 50mm - usually it is cheaper too I think - at least if it´s a Canon.

Sorry to not concur with your current tendency

 

[PropilotBW]

I would get the 35mm.

 

[freddy21]

I would also recommend the 35mm over the 50mm. I got the 50mm and while it is a great lens focal distances are a little long for indoors in close quarters.

 

[Piccell]

I would also recommend the 35mm over the 50mm. I got the 50mm and while it is a great lens focal distances are a little long for indoors in close quarters.

Not a lot of landscape photographers stay indoors anymore though, ever since they discovered that whole 'outside' thing.

 

[freddy21]

Yes but on occasion you can go indoors too. Since the OP said "all round" I would think that would mean both in and out doors.

 

[weepete]

Depends, if you have a crop sensor camera it's not really wide enough for a general landscape lens. I'd be looking for a lens thats 22mm at the most because of the wider field of view.

If you have a full frame camera then a 35mm lens would be ok.

A lot of it will depend on what and how you shoot. I find it better to shoot at the longer end if landscapes have vertical elements (mountains, sea stacks etc) or if you are shooting breaking waves and the like, because longer lenses tend to make vertical components of the background look bigger because of perspective. if your compositions include a lot of foreground and horizontals then the extra with can be more beneficial to include more foreground and sky.

 

[Gary A.]

Weepete makes a very good observation that you are shooting with a crop sensor camera. You can shoot landscapes with any focal length lens, but the longer and wider you go the more 'specialized' the resulting images and the more selective your photo opportunities. For a 'General' landscape lens, I think would fall between 24mm and 30mm on a full frame camera. On a crop sensored camera, ala a Nikon D3300, that would translate to lenses between 16mm and 20mm. For your first 'landscape' wide angle I suggest something around a 28mm FF or 18mm-20mm DX. What is your budget? For landscape autofocus isn't necessary y0u can pick up non-AF lenses much cheaper than those that AF.

 

[Gary A.]

B&H, (a good bar for pricing photo gear), has:

1) Rokinon 16mm, F/2, MF, @ $349;
2) Rokinon 20mm, F/1.8, MF, @ $599 (rounded diaphragm blades for softer bokeh);
3) Samyang 16mm, F/2, MF, @ $419; and
4) Samyang 20mm, F/1.4, MF, @ $499.

Rokinon and Samyang come from the same manufacturer in Korea (IIRC). These are well constructed and very sharp lenses. You have to do some research to fully understand why the Rokinon 16mm is less than the Samyang 16mm. Some of their lenses have focus confirmation and some do not. I have never used a D3300 and I haven't a clue to how well MF works with a D3300. But if you're on a budget and the primary use of the lens is for landscape, I'd take a hard look at these lenses.

 

[Pedro_lopez]

The 35 or 50 go for less then 200 so I was thinking one of these options at the very moment. If I had to wait I can definitely save up for something better, I have a coworker ahead of time on the photography curve and he mentioned I should get the 11-16mm Tokina. Although this isn't a prime lens which Is what I'm looking for and is a little up there for me right now.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Dave442]

I would go with the 35mm. If you are really going for that background blur then just keep saving for the 85mm. I often use my 35mm for landscape and just make a panorama shot.

Of course it could be fun to try one of the manual focus lenses that Gary mentioned, but the 35mm is a good first prime lens.

 

[AlanKlein]

Why do you want to duplicate what you can do with your zoom lenses? A 35mm or 50mm won't compliment anything you already own. Use your money on a telephoto lens like 105mm? Expand your range. The zoom will also give you a lot of narrow DOF, bokah and blurry backgrounds. Good luck on whatever you decide.