50mm or 35mm?

JohnnyL · Nov 26, 2009

Hi , so I was set on the Nikon 50mm f1.8 because it's sharp and works well in low light but my friend recommends the 35mm f1.8 instead! He says , because I'm using a Nikon D80 ,which has a 1.5x crop factor , the 50mm will become a 75mm. So I'm wondering , do the numbers really matter? Is a 75mm bad? Why would a 35mm be better than a 50mm?

Reasons I want the 50mm , as I said above , is image quality and allows for low light. I also don't mind a prime lens instead of my current 18-55. In fact , I rather have a prime lens on the camera more than the 18-55. Also , the 50mm is '' cheap and good '' but the 35mm is almost double the price , which makes me lean toward the 50 but more importantly , which would be better for me?

Lastly , which of these lenses would be better for street and walking-around photography?

Thanks!

pugnacious33 · Nov 26, 2009

Depends on what you intend to shoot most with it. 50 would make a better portrait lens. 35 better for landscapes/scenics, in general. Probably not a bad idea to have both focal lengths covered, whether it be primes or zoom.

PatrickHMS · Nov 26, 2009

With the new AF-S 35mm priced at $200.00, I have seen several of the older AF Nikkor f/2 lenses for sale priced between $100.00 - $125.00

Unless you shoot with a D40 and need AF-S lenses you could cover both the 35mm and 50mm focal lengths with nice used lenses for a total of $250.00 or so.

I liked my 35mm f/2 pretty well, but decided to go with zoom lenses for fewer lens changes, so I sold it awhile back.

wescobts · Nov 26, 2009

Your friend is right, with the crop factor it is 75 mm, which I find comfortable, especially on the "street". I have the 35 mm F2 and it is also a very fine lens. I do find it more at home indoors or in settings that are a little tighter. I say get the 50 mm and really give it a workout, and then down the road the 35 or even the 20 mm would be a good addition.

battletone · Nov 26, 2009

Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

Atlas77 · Nov 26, 2009

battletone said:
Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

+1.

Or head into the shop with or without your camera, usually at henrys they can mount any lenses to try out for me. Try both out see which one you like better and buy it. (ps. Post some pictures when you have it

)

Dwig · Nov 26, 2009

battletone said:
Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

Exactly!

You should do at least one of the following:

1. Set your current zoom to 35mm and use tape to fix it at that FL. Now go shoot the type of thing that you shoot with this "new fast lens". Do this for a good long shooting session or two (over more than one day). Now repeat with the lens fixed at 50mm. After reviewing both sets of pictures, consider which FL best fits that type of shot you'll use the "new fast lens" for.

2. Using an application that can review the EXIF data in image files, review all of your recent (last year, last 6 months, ...) images that would be similar to what you'd shoot with the "new fast lens" to see what FL you used most frequently.

kundalini · Nov 26, 2009

Your friend is right, with the crop factor it is 75 mm, .....

Bollucks! This is internet dribble.

If you have a 35mm lens or a 50mm lens, that is what you have... period. The focal length does not change. However, the field of view (FoV) does narrow. Do more research to find out the difference.

I have the 35mm f/2 & the 50mm f/1.8. Both are fine lenses. I do not endorse DX lenses personally, but the new 35mm f/1.8 is supposed to be a nice lens. For street type photography, I think you will find the 35mm a good focal length, but then again, so is the 50mm. I also have a D80.

Go into a local shop and try both of them out, unless you do as suggested above. But due to the fact the either of these lenses ARE NOT kit material, there will be a difference in what you can accomplish with them versus the kit lens at the respective focal lengths

Pugs · Nov 26, 2009

battletone said:
Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

Because the 18-55mm kit lens is a DX lens and will not give you the same field of view and 35mm and 50mm prime non-DX lenses. Also, the 18-55 kit lens has TERRIBLE barrel distortion at the lower focal lengths... even at 35mm you start to see it.

The 35mm and the 50mm are really good lenses, but have different applications. Personally, I find the 50 to be more versatile and less specialized.

Cojaro · Nov 26, 2009

The 18-55mm VR kit lens has very little barrel/pincushion distortion (except at the 18mm focal length, where the barrel distortion is somewhat pronounced.)

Pugs · Nov 26, 2009

Hm...

I don't know about the VR version. I have the 18-55mm non-VR version. I almost never use the thing due to the excessive distortion.

Dwig · Nov 26, 2009

Pugs said:
battletone said:

Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

Click to expand...

Because the 18-55mm kit lens is a DX lens and will not give you the same field of view

Completely incorrect, wrong, and balderdash!

A 35mm DX lens and a 35mm FX lens are both 35mm lenses and will deliver exactly the same FOV when used on a DX body. Even when used on an FX body, they will yield the same subject size from identical subjects at identical distances. The difference is only that the FX lens will provide a large enough image circle to cover a 24x36mm image (42mm image diagonal) while a DX lens won't. A DX lens will generally be limited to a 28-30mm image diagonal.

Pugs · Nov 26, 2009

Dwig said:
Pugs said:

battletone said:

Why not set your current lens at 35mm and 50mm and see which one will fit you better?

Click to expand...

Because the 18-55mm kit lens is a DX lens and will not give you the same field of view

Click to expand...

Completely incorrect, wrong, and balderdash!

A 35mm DX lens and a 35mm FX lens are both 35mm lenses and will deliver exactly the same FOV when used on a DX body. Even when used on an FX body, they will yield the same subject size from identical subjects at identical distances. The difference is only that the FX lens will provide a large enough image circle to cover a 24x36mm image (42mm image diagonal) while a DX lens won't. A DX lens will generally be limited to a 28-30mm image diagonal.

Clearly, I've got some further learning to do. Thank you for the correction.

I'm curious about the tone. I've respected you and many of your posts in the past. I'm not sure what I've done to attract the somewhat... rude... tone of your post, but my skin's not all that thin, so I'll let it go.

molested_cow · Nov 26, 2009

For a long time I've thought the same about focal length being "converted" simply because of how people or the internet explain it, then after I really understood what it's all about, I realized that it's only because lens are designed to cast image onto a 35mm negative area, whereas most DSLR's don't have a sensor that is that big. Therefore the smaller sensor, which now acts as the film, can only capture a portion of the image that the lens casts. It just means you are not maximizing the full capability of the lens.

I don't know what your future plan is. If you plan to upgrade to a full frame body eventually, I will recommend a 50mm because it's also my favorite focal length to work with for street and portraits. I have a 35mm SLR body, so it's less complicated for me when it comes to choosing lens.

Oh, and I also recommend looking at used, older lens. For short lens like 50 or 35mm, I seriously don't think you need VR or AF. If your camera body can take a manual lens, I'd say spend the money on a good used one. You can probably get both for the money as someone mentioned. However, I think you need to have at least a D200 body to do that.