Any point in keeping a 50 when I use the 35 more?

I rented the 24-120 when I went to utah and loved it. Still kicking myself that I didn't just buy the kit with my 750
 
Looks like a nice lens, I guess the poor 50 got tossed off to the side again.
 
I forgot to mention, that I might be getting a free 35 1.8 DX. I know you can use this on FX with rather minor vignetting. Free lens? Me takie. Haha
 
I remember trying it when I got my D600 and ended up selling it, but YMMV. I'd rather the FX 35mm if I wanted that focal length
 
besides the chromatic aberration i had with that on that 35mm 1.8 DX lens on a DX lens i thought it was pretty nice.
 
When I bought my D610, I instantly bought the 50 1.8G along with it..because I thought..if you have a full frame camera..you gotta have a 50 to go along with it.

For my style of shooting...I found the 50mm focal length not my favorite, so I ended up buying the 35 f/2D and absolutely fell in love with that lens. It hardly comes off my body. I find the 35 f/2D far more versatile for my style of shooting.

Since buying the 35 f/2D, I maybe used the 50 1.8G maybe twice. Not that its a bad lens or anything..its sharp..awesome bokeh..but I just didn't "feel" it you know?

So what I am thinking of doing is selling the 50 1.8G and my vintage Sigma 28 f/2.8 MF lens (it doesn't handle the 24mp sensor very well) and putting it toward a ultra wide angle lens. I'm a budget right now so I'm looking at the 20 2.8D and the 18-35D. I know a lot of people like the 20 2.8D, it is a pretty decent lens and not terribly expensive. But I'm really unsure about the 18-35D...I heard a lot of bad things about it but I know a few people here have got that lens on the cheap and said its actually pretty good.

But I just want to hear your opinions. Is there any really reason to keep the 50? The only thing it might be useful is portraits in a tight location when I can't use my 105 2.8G..but then again..I rarely do portraits anyways!

I think having a ultra wide angle would be far more beneficial to me. It would be a goal to get a higher end ultra wide like the 16-35 f/4 or maybe even the 14-24..but I just can't afford that right now and I just want something to get me by for now.
 
"Back in the good old days" I always despised the 135mm lens. Manufacturers and retailers and photo mags (big stuff back then) were touting it as a perfect telephoto lens for portraits and even sports. I always thought it was too long for portraits and way too short for a lot of sports. One day I went to the US Tennis Open in New York City and found a spot for great photos that was perfect for -- you guessed it -- the 135mm lens. You never know.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top