Having problems choosing a prime (Nikon)

Samriel · Jul 3, 2008

Mike_E, I wasn't considering the 28mm since it doesn't seem to be able to perform better then my Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, both concerning vignetting, resolution and distortions. Of course, this opinion is based purely on reading reviews. tests etc. If you have any pictures with the 28mm 2.8, I'd like to see them. I also like that the 35mm can focus as close as the 28mm.

Kundalini, thanks for the photo. I have a Tokina 100mm 2.8 Macro, it has really nice bokeh and is quite good for portraits outdoors, but as you said, I find the working distance to long indoors, and I'm planning on shooting more indoors (quasi-studio). The 105mm DC seems good as well, but until I can get more space to take photos indoors, it'll have to wait. Also, as you said money IS a problem.

I'll go to a camera store today and put all of the mentioned lenses on. I'll try to shoot some shots to get an idea of the bokeh at different apertures etc. I'll try to post them over the weekend.

Mav · Jul 4, 2008

kundalini said:
I find it very difficult to use terms like Yuck or ugly in regard to the bokeh produced by the 85mm f/1.8. I find the bokeh to be quite good. Wide open at f/1.8, no it's not going to perform it's best. Most lenses are the same, stop it down a little and find the sweet spot. When are you going to shoot protraits at f/1.8? Probably never and more likely you'll shoot in the f/2.8 to f/4, maybe f/5.6, range to get the isolation and desired bokeh.

If you're careful about your backgrounds and don't have any bright light points in them to create the ugliness, you can still have nice smooth bokeh with the f/1.8.

And the whole reason to get these lenses is to shoot them wide-open for ultra tight DOF and great subject isolation for portraits. I know people that shoot the 85mm f/1.4 lens @ f/1.4 practically all the time and the results are stunning. Here's one from me at f/1.8.

See any ugly bokeh? I don't - because I had a nice neutral looking background. The other sample I posted above was from the same wedding where I wasn't so careful, and I had no idea I even needed to be so careful.

Mike_E · Jul 4, 2008

Samriel said:
Mike_E, I wasn't considering the 28mm since it doesn't seem to be able to perform better then my Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, both concerning vignetting, resolution and distortions. Of course, this opinion is based purely on reading reviews. tests etc. If you have any pictures with the 28mm 2.8, I'd like to see them. I also like that the 35mm can focus as close as the 28mm.

Kundalini, thanks for the photo. I have a Tokina 100mm 2.8 Macro, it has really nice bokeh and is quite good for portraits outdoors, but as you said, I find the working distance to long indoors, and I'm planning on shooting more indoors (quasi-studio). The 105mm DC seems good as well, but until I can get more space to take photos indoors, it'll have to wait. Also, as you said money IS a problem.

I'll go to a camera store today and put all of the mentioned lenses on. I'll try to shoot some shots to get an idea of the bokeh at different apertures etc. I'll try to post them over the weekend.

Look, as far as focal length goes, at 300 DPI you are not going to be able to tell the difference on any print up to 16X20 any way. The primes are not going to help much at all unless you have a really bad example of your short zoom. The only difference is going to be the DOF and Bokeh from larger apertures -f/1.8, f/1.4, f/1.2.

If you look at the orange cat on your left
( his name is Aahz- no relation

), his photo was taken with a 135mm f/2.8 while he was sitting on the floor. The background (the floor about a foot away) looks the way it does because I also had an 11mm extension tube attached.

I say this to point out that you might be better off with a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (the VR if you have an extra $800 to spend) and a set of extension tubes. There are even tubes out there that will allow auto focus.

Spend some time thinking about what would make you happiest hanging on your wall and get what ever allows you to take one of those.

good luck.

(ok i know it's a tiny photo but still..)

Samriel · Jul 7, 2008

I went and played with the lenses. Here come the pictures. I'm sorry I couldn't find a better and more challenging background, but I can only test the lenses in store. Also, some of the lenses have been tested quite a lot and were dirty, so ignore the haziness in some shots.

Nikon 35mm f/2 (wide open)

Nikon 35mm f/2 (wide open)

Nikon 50mm f1.8 (wide open)

Nikon 50mm f/1.8 (f/4)

Nikon 50mm f1.8 (wide open)

Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (wide open)

Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (f/4)

Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (wide open)

Nikon 85mm f/1.8 (wide open)

Nikon 85mm f/1.8 (f/4)

Nikon 85mm f/1.8 (wide open)

As I said, there was no better (more challenging) subject for the bokeh at the moment. Also, for the 85mm 1.8 I had to change shops, since the lens in the first shop was broken. Therefore the background is different.
Although I like the 85mm f/1.8 as well, I'll get the 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.4. Really like the working distance and DoF on both, and I think they'll do good for what I need them. Once I start shooting more outdoors, I'll start thinking more about the 85mm.

Thanks for the advise Mike_E, actually really helped me make the final decision. Now I'm going to get the lenses and start shooting some nice things for my wall. :thumbup: