Confused about the 50mm....

PerfectlyFlawed · May 4, 2010

So I've been 'Googling' all week... and started up first thing this morning, hoping to find a 50 mm lens within the 100 dollar range. ( if thats possible )

I want a lens directed *more* towards portraits... ( thats most of what I have been shooting lately )..

I see the 50mm 1.4 is the better? ( if i read correctly) although, not cheap.
...and what is throwing me off, is there are many different types of the 50mm 1.8...( the cheaper one?)

I have the D5000, so it would obviously have to work with that--which i haven't fully grasped the concept of compatibility and lenses...whats goes to which camera..what focuses with who...etc.

So my *main* question is... as i am looking for a 50mm lens, WHICH would be not only cheaper, but AF and be somewhat noobie friendly....??

I can find the sales, i just have no idea what would really work and if they AF with my camera... and which one...you know?? LOL

Any help would be greatly appreciated...

Heres *1* Of the comparison lists i could find...
Nikon 50mm Lens Comparison

Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D Review

*This one seems ancient ..lol and complicated to me for some reason *
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF Nikkor

Eventually ill save up for this.. but i need something cheapish.
http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/NK5014AFGU.html
or would i be better with MF? Ugh...:gah:lol.. ok Ill Stfu Now.

Those are only a few different links im looking at... just wanted to show some of what i am finding here.. Sorry for the *same ol Noobie* question..

PerfectlyFlawed · May 4, 2010

Nikon AF-S DX 35mm F/1.8G Lens, With Nikon 5-Year USA Warranty | BuyDig.com

Something like this perhaps?

SwissJ · May 4, 2010

PerfectlyFlawed said:
as i am looking for a 50mm lens, WHICH would be not only cheaper, but AF and be somewhat noobie friendly....??

If you really want the AF, none of those lenses will fully AF on the D5000, because the lenses don't have focus motors. You would have to MF, but I believe there's an focus assist feature that tells you when the object is in focus as you turn the focus ring. Not sure exactly how that works cause I don't shoot Nikon.

But I do know that for full AF on the D5000, you need the 50mm 1.4 AF-S or settle for the 35mm 1.8 AF-S.

PerfectlyFlawed · May 4, 2010

But I do know that for full AF on the D5000, you need the 50mm 1.4 AF-S or settle for the 35mm 1.8 AF-S.

Ok so that 35mm is good for portraits, right? Thats what i was just looking at... because it popped up when i was searching for the 50.

id *prefer* AF, but if MF is noob friendly im willing to learn...

i would rather learn on something AF though, ya know what i mean ? lol

Thanks for the help~

bigtwinky · May 4, 2010

I dont think that 35mm is a standard focal lenght for portraits. Its a wider lens, and thus will slightly distort images. Not as bad as a 24mm.

On a full frame, the standard range is from 85mm-105mm. Sure, you can do some great work at 35, but its not the norm.

Translated to a crop sensor camera, 85mm = approx 50mm

Derrel · May 4, 2010

I would not buy either the 35mm or 50mm focal length primes as "portrait" lenses. The 35mm is too short a focal length for pleasing portraiture, and the 50mm lenses Nikon makes are no great shakes either at rendering faces in a pleasant way. A little bit longer lens, like the 85mm 1.8 AF-D would be a better choice I think.

35mm is not really "good for portraits". The lens is short, and you will be forced to shoot from rather close distances to get frame-filling shots, and the close distance will tend to exaggerate the size of the nose in relation to the eyes, and any limbs that are positioned toward the camera will appear disproportionately large in relation to the rest of the body. It seems like this confusion regarding 35 and 50mm primes is spreading across the web--somehow these focal lengths are becoming thought of as good portraiture lengths, due to a strict focal length angle of view conversion by people multiplying FL x sensor crop FOV factor and automatically promoting 35's and 50's to portraiture duty. Not trying to bag on your POV, I'm just saying neither a 35 nor a 509mm prime are really the best tools for portraiture. They are both too short, and neither one has really pleasing bokeh compared with some of the more-traditional choices, like an 85mm for example.

Dallmeyer · May 4, 2010

Can we clarify something: 50mm on a 1.6x crop sensor = 85mm FOV not focal length. The focal length remains 50mm and also the facially distorting effect of the lens used close remains as per a 50mm. Correct or incorrect?

Dallmeyer · May 4, 2010

I agree Derrel The unremarkable bokeh of many (most?) 50mm is a significant consideration. A lens made for portraiture will be that much better in this repect.

Derrel said:
I would not buy either the 35mm or 50mm focal length primes as "portrait" lenses. The 35mm is too short a focal length for pleasing portraiture, and the 50mm lenses Nikon makes are no great shakes either at rendering faces in a pleasant way. A little bit longer lens, like the 85mm 1.8 AF-D would be a better choice I think.

35mm is not really "good for portraits". The lens is short, and you will be forced to shoot from rather close distances to get frame-filling shots, and the close distance will tend to exaggerate the size of the nose in relation to the eyes, and any limbs that are positioned toward the camera will appear disproportionately large in relation to the rest of the body. It seems like this confusion regarding 35 and 50mm primes is spreading across the web--somehow these focal lengths are becoming thought of as good portraiture lengths, due to a strict focal length angle of view conversion by people multiplying FL x sensor crop FOV factor and automatically promoting 35's and 50's to portraiture duty. Not trying to bag on your POV, I'm just saying neither a 35 nor a 509mm prime are really the best tools for portraiture. They are both too short, and neither one has really pleasing bokeh compared with some of the more-traditional choices, like an 85mm for example.

bigtwinky · May 4, 2010

When discussion crop sensors and their effect on lenses and viewing angles, it should be referred to as "effective focal range". The 50mm lens will act as a longer lens does if used on a crop sensor. To my knowledge, there is no difference in distortion whether you use the lens at the same focal lenght on a crop, 4/3 or full frame.

And can we also clarify that not all crop sensors are x1.6? Nikon is at x1.5 and I believe some Olympus cameras are at x2.0.

PerfectlyFlawed · May 4, 2010

oh wow...

Thank you guys for clearing that up...
I did notice it said "wide angle" on the 35.. i was confused as to why it kept popping up in relation to the 50. Oh man i was confused! LOL

So i googled the 85mm 1.8 AF-D, and looks like anywhere from 250-400+ bucks for that... (OUCH) As much as id LOVE that lens.. I cant afford anything over 150 right now.. so I wonder what would be my next resort..

So i was looking for a budget affordable, portrait lens... And i just noticed EVERYONE has these 50mm.... ( i can upgrade later)

Why are they so popular? lol hmm.

Now on another note... ( considering i only gave the 2 lenses states in my sig).. would the 200mm be better out of the 2 for portraits "for now"?

mwcfarms · May 4, 2010

Popular because they work well in low light for the price hehe. I bought mine and actually havent played with it enough. What can I say i guess the necessity to move my feet to zoom makes me lazy. :lol:

PerfectlyFlawed · May 4, 2010

mwcfarms said:
Popular because they work well in low light for the price hehe. I bought mine and actually havent played with it enough. What can I say i guess the necessity to move my feet to zoom makes me lazy.

MW, I'll take it off your hands for ya

LOL :lmao::lmao::lmao:

<3 the zoom hahah!:thumbup:

Dallmeyer · May 4, 2010

bigtwinky said:
When discussion crop sensors and their effect on lenses and viewing angles, it should be referred to as "effective focal range". The 50mm lens will act as a longer lens does if used on a crop sensor. To my knowledge, there is no difference in distortion whether you use the lens at the same focal lenght on a crop, 4/3 or full frame.

And can we also clarify that not all crop sensors are x1.6? Nikon is at x1.5 and I believe some Olympus cameras are at x2.0.

Thanks for the clarification. My Canon 100D is 1.6 crop but it varies among a few different systems...Nikon, the MFTs. Regarding the effective focal range as it can be termed, I would think the 50mm is behaving as intended in terms of optical distortion, a user on a crop sensor body continues to utilise the central area of the optic rather than the periphery. I took a portrait of someone the other day with a 2/58 on a canon crop 1.6. I will take a look at it again and try to judge if/how it has distorted the features maybe.

Dallmeyer · May 4, 2010

PerfectlyFlawed said:
Now on another note... ( considering i only gave the 2 lenses states in my sig).. would the 200mm be better out of the 2 for portraits "for now"?

I'm wondering the 200mm may be a little softer than the 50mm which could be a nice thing for portraits.
You'd need some space to use the 200mm though..like 20 feet!

c.cloudwalker · May 4, 2010

The distortion is extremely minimal but the 35mm is a bit short for a portrait lens, even on a crop sensor, unless you like being right against your subject.

The 50mm, which I find a boring lens on a full frame, makes a fairly decent portrait lens on a crop body. And, yes, it's a cheap lens so long as you don't get a 1.4 of faster which you shouldn't need for portraits.

Lack of AF is no big deal to me because I'd never had it until a year ago. I don't find manual focus to be a problem but some people here seem to... Unfortunately I can't tell you any more as I don't know Nikon lenses.