35mm f/1.8 AF-S or 85mm f/1.8G AF-S DX for crop sensor?

OfMikeandMen

TPF Noob!
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
48
Reaction score
1
Location
United States
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I am about to get my first lens, and would prefer either the 35mm or 85mm. The reason for this is the person I shoot with already has a 50mm lens. I've shot with it. I really like the lens, but I'd like to have something different, since I have access to the 50mm lens at any time.

I am looking to do mainly portraits and wedding photography (this is my end goal, for now). I've watched extensive reviews, videos, and have looked at both image qualities. However, most of the pictures I've seen for the 85mm were on a full frame camera, so I'm uncertain how an 85mm would look with a 1.5 crop factor. Not to mention this seems incredibly inconvenient for indoor shooting.

Aesthetically the 35mm is more pleasing to me, but the bokeh on the 85mm seems to be arguably one of the best for Nikon lenses. I'm sure in time I will end up getting a 85mm lens, but I'm just uncertain which one to go with at this time. It seems since the 50mm prime is a solid choice for full frame lenses, that a 35mm with the 1.5 crop factor would be a fair equivalent.

If I seem leaning towards the 35mm it's solely because it's cost is about half, and I've never really shot with at 85mm. It just seems safe to go with the 35mm. Obviously, however, since lenses, I hear, are a lifetime investment, I want to make sure I am making a decent choice. As time progresses, I will probably upgrade to a 1.4, but financially, and at my current skill-level and interest, I'd prefer to spend less.

Suggestions?
 
Last edited:
My suggestion: Get both.

You're trying to 'compare' two lenses that are designed for totally different uses. It's like asking, "Do I get the Porsche 911, or the Kenworth T660?"
 
You will likely find the 35mm more versatile and useful at this time. I would imagine the 85mm would be used less often (portraits) while the 35mm for almost everything else. Get the 35mm.
 
You will likely find the 35mm more versatile and useful at this time. I would imagine the 85mm would be used less often (portraits) while the 35mm for almost everything else. Get the 35mm.

Long lenses aren't just for portraits. 85s will reach where 35s won't. Especially in the world of wedding photography. I would take the 85, but I also shoot only full frame bodies so its more versatile for me.
 
Back when I had my D40, I only had the Nikon 35mm f1.8 (along with the kit lenses). It's a great every day lens and I loved it, but for portraits, I'd use the 50mm or 85mm as they should separate your subject from the background better than the 35mm. The 50 if you want full body, and the 85 for head shots. I'm sure the 35 would work for full body, but I'm not sure how much distortion it'll have compared to the 50. Also, I doubt you would want to use a 35mm at weddings as you'll definitely have to be much closer to the action. Of note, I have never used a 50mm lens before on my D40, or my Canon T2i (aside from testing a lens).
 
35/50/85 is a classic prime-lens trio. All are useful focal lengths, for one thing or another. Which focal lengths to use or carry depends on the shooter, and the subject matter, and the desired results. On APS-C, the 85 is a narrow angle of view lens, which means that when it is on, the photographer has to make "telephoto pictures", which are typically shallower DOF shots, that show subjects large in the frame, and which are completely different from "wide-angle pictures", which would be shot with something in the 14-24mm length range on a 1.5x body.

I learned telephoto shooting on the old 135mm focal length on 35mm. It's got its very own niche. The equivalent angle of view on 1.5x is more like 127mm, which is probably even handier than 135mm. If you want a focal length that has less depth compression, and offers a bit more depth of field, and also offers the ability to show more background context, then the 35mm lens is going to be more of an appropriate choice.

If you are building a lens kit for the future, keep in mind that the 85mm 1.8 AF-S G Nikkor is one of the best 85mm's in the world in terms of optical performance, and is a long-term acquisition that will not need to be replaced in the forseeable future, whereas the 35/1.8 G-series is a sort of econo-35, and will not fully cover FX frame size. Of course, it is also a low-priced lens too. FOr a guy who wants to do weddings and INDOOR shots, the 85 on APS-C is too long a lens for much versatility; the 35 will be better for versatility at weddings and events, parties, and so on. For "reach" and for "selective angle of view", the 85 is fine, but yes, it is inconvenient in smaller rooms indoors, and even in big rooms, it requires you to stand pretty far away to photograph standing people at full-length. That means people can easily get in between you and the subjects when you are 35-50 feet away from them.
 
You will likely find the 35mm more versatile and useful at this time. I would imagine the 85mm would be used less often (portraits) while the 35mm for almost everything else. Get the 35mm.

Long lenses aren't just for portraits. 85s will reach where 35s won't. Especially in the world of wedding photography. I would take the 85, but I also shoot only full frame bodies so its more versatile for me.

I threw this lens on my camera d7000 and found the lens very restrictive for overall shooting. I do agree about the reach though but I still think the 35mm will offer more versatility, at least on a DX body.
 
I personally got the 85mm (Sigma) before I got the 35mm (Sigma). The 85 instantly became my most used lens and stayed on my D90 (DX) camera most of the time. For outdoor portraits, or tight indoor candids in available light, the 85 is an amazing lens. However, it was too tight - even on my FX camera - in some cases so I bought the new Sigma 35mm as well. The 35 was much better for tight indoor spaces as well as environmental portraits and group shots. Both are exceptional tools but they are both designed for and excel at specific jobs. I think you will need to decide which you need more now and which you can wait till later on based on what you want to accomplish.
 
I find the 85mm very versatile even on a DX camera. the 35 and 85 are really two different animals though, and its really tough to compare them side by side.
 
My suggestion: Get both.

You're trying to 'compare' two lenses that are designed for totally different uses. It's like asking, "Do I get the Porsche 911, or the Kenworth T660?"

What he said ^^^^^^
 
How much shooting have you done? Do you currently shoot a lot of portraits? Are you currently doing these things, or are you getting started now?
 
I have a 35mm 1.8g for sale if you need one $160 shipped.
 
Definitely the 35mm, as it's a fantastically focal length for crop sensors. The 85mm is more of a specialized shoulder/head portrait lens on crop sensor, and frankly most people would prefer a 70-200mm f2.8 for that purpose.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top