Travel lenses ?

justjonny · May 1, 2017

Hi, I am going away for a few months this summer and I just got my first DSLR camera. I got the Nikon D5500 and I am looking for a good lens to match up with my kit lens. I've heard primes are very good for travel but is there any other recommendations? I am also indecisive on the 50mm vs the 35mm primes

Thanks in advance

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

Derrel · May 1, 2017

I THINK the 50mm is the better-quality prime lens, the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G series for your camera...it is fast, at f/1.8 maximum aperture, and the kit lens is amply at 35mm, but lacking in speed at 50-55mm, being only f/5.6 at that range.

Designer · May 1, 2017

justjonny said:
I've heard primes are very good for travel but is there any other recommendations?

Primes are very good for anything, but what kind of travel?

Where are you going, what mode of transportation, what photographs do you intend to take, what is your budget? etc.

You will absolutely love the 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G for nearly everything. You might want a long telephoto if you're going into lion country, for instance. You've got every focal length covered from 18mm to 55mm, so anything 200mm or longer might be something to consider. Especially for those long shots of lions.

shadowlands · May 1, 2017

I did Taos recently with only a 20mm 1.8G and 50mm 1.8G. Honestly worked out great.
On my way home from NM, I stopped at the Palo Duro Canyon in Texas. Spotted a beautiful mountain lion, and the closest I could get was my 50mm in DX mode...
Did a ton of cropping when I got home. Missed my zooms, at that moment.

justjonny · May 1, 2017

Hi all. Thanks for all the input so far I really appreciate it. I am going to Europe so I will be taking a lot of street photos, landscapes and most likely portraits among the landscapes

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

justjonny · May 1, 2017

I've also been looking at maybe a 18-200mm lens? Would that be optional?

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

Designer · May 1, 2017

justjonny said:
I've also been looking at maybe a 18-200mm lens? Would that be optional?

It is optional, but not optimal. Meaning it's not one of the better lenses.

A 55-200 would fill the gap and be inexpensive to acquire.

zombiesniper · May 1, 2017

I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest that if you are relatively new to photography that you don't buy a new 50 or 35mm lens. You have those currently covered with the kit lens.
If you wish to go longer to cover a range you don't currently have then fine.

My reason for this is that primes at any focal length are much less forgiving then even a short zoom range. A shot that would be just a bit too close for a prime in the hands of an experienced photographer is no issue but for a novice is just a missed shot.

If you are experienced then you will get mixed results since some will say the 50 is a go to lens while others will love the 35. Shoot with the kit lens and see where you shoot the most. That focal length should be your next prime purchase in the 18-55 range.

nerwin · May 3, 2017

Instead of buying a prime.

You should consider getting yourself a Sigma 17-50 2.8 or even the Sigma 17-70 2.8-f/4 Contemporary, those would work pretty well for travel.

For doing a mixture of subjects, portraits, landscapes, street, etc. I think similar lenses I listed above will work great.

Nothing wrong with the 18-55 kit and if you wanted to stick with that, then maybe adding a telephoto to your kit would be a great addition.

justjonny · May 5, 2017

Thanks again for all the advice so far. I am leaning towards the 35mm for now. I think it will be a good learning experience and it is also within my budget

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

PaulWog · May 9, 2017

justjonny said:
Thanks again for all the advice so far. I am leaning towards the 35mm for now. I think it will be a good learning experience and it is also within my budget

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

The 35mm 1.8G DX lens is definitely the more versatile lens on the D5500. However, if you don't shoot between f1.8 and f2.8 on the 35mm 1.8G, your kit lens will likely do a similar job.

Where the 35mm 1.8G DX is fun, is when you're travelling, and taking pictures of people in places, and you want shallow depth of field. On a hike? Walking through the city? In a building? It's pretty useful.

Limitations you might run into: It doesn't zoom. When I was a beginner, I wanted to zoom in tighter to my subject. For example, my girlfriend would be on the sidewalk on a trip to Seattle, and you think okay get a waist-up shot, maybe a bit of bokeh but enough depth of field to show some shops/water in the background. With more experience, I find I often don't need zoom to bring myself closer to my subject, since I'm very often not far enough away. Experience has led me to usually take shots including the entire body, including feet -- usually you'll get more desirable photos. Remember, there's a purpose to any photograph; a photo that gets too tight on the subject often cuts out the story or the feeling of the adventure (the point of travelling). You might find 35mm to be a bit limiting if you really do need to get closer, but if that's happening often & you're not doing shots of birds/something similar, you probably want something on DX that goes to 135mm or 200mm. The 50mm focal length will absolutely be too long in many situations, making stepping back and framing a bit difficult, and even with correct framing it might just be too narrow anyways (narrowing of the background/foreground due to longer focal length).

On the flip side of zooming, not being able to go wider can end up being a bit of a pain, and 35mm on DX is just as wide as it is long (it's just... normal). Usually you need to take a step back or so, but sometimes you just can't fit enough of the scenery after framing your subject how you want them in the photo. For example, you fit your subject in, full body. You don't want the subject to appear smaller, but you want more in the photo. You can lock exposure and lock focus, and do a quick pano to stitch together later (2 shots, 3 shots, whatever)... but sometimes, going wider is what you want. To this, I say the 35mm focal length on DX is pretty much ideal in terms of trade-offs (with the 35mm focal length on DX, you'll probably tackle most shots in a good way - if you move yourself to the right spot for composition - than if you carried around any other single prime lens on a vacation).

Solarflare · May 12, 2017

A 35mm (53mm full frame equivalent) is a so-called normal lens on a crop sensor. Normal lens means its neither a wide lens nor a telephoto / long lens, but middle of the road. They are supposed to show the world a lot like we see it, with no compressed proportions like with a telephoto lens, or exaggerated proportions like with a wide lens. Normal lenses are typically seen as between 40-45mm to about 60mm, full frame equivalent.

Normal lenses and mild wide angle lenses are usually seen as the most general prime lenses. Thats why all these prime lens compacts have mild wide angle lenses:
- Ricoh GR, Fujifilm X70, Nikon Coolpix A, Leica Q: 28mm
- Fujifilm X100, Leica X: 35mm

Thus yes the 35mm (53mm full frame equiv) will allow you more flexibility than the 50mm (75mm full frame equiv). However photography is an art and your personal artistic choice might be you are more focused on longer focal lengths. Longer focal lengths give you more shallow depth and allow you to isolate your subjects better, and they tend to make people look better in portraiture. The ideal distance to a person for portraiture is about 5 meter, and with 75mm (full frame equiv) thats enough to capture a standing person.

katsrevenge · May 12, 2017

justjonny said:
Hi, I am going away for a few months this summer and I just got my first DSLR camera. I got the Nikon D5500 and I am looking for a good lens to match up with my kit lens. I've heard primes are very good for travel but is there any other recommendations? I am also indecisive on the 50mm vs the 35mm primes

Thanks in advance

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

Speaking as an enthusiastic somewhat beginner who has a D5200 (an older version of your camera)...
Primes are amazing. They take better photos in lower light and you can get image effects with them that you can't get with a kit lens. I own both the 35mm and the 50mm and love them both.

That said, they do take some getting used to, if you're used to a zoom (and frankly, most of us are). You will need to walk around a scene to sometimes get the best angle or to take in a large space. If you have a 50mm on the camera, you really won't be able to do the sweeping panoramas either. If I had to have just one.. I would probably just leave the 35mm on my camera. It can do a wider scene more easily but still takes amazing close-ups. If you are bored or curious to see some of the differences/similarities between the two lenses, most of the last two or three pages of my flickr were taken with either a 35 or a 50.

The 35mm DX version lens (DX is made for D5xxx cameras) is pretty cheap. If you can, pick one up, slap it on the camera and walk around with it for a month before you go anywhere. That should be enough time before your trip to let you know if that's the lens you want and to get used to using a prime.

That said, if I was going on a trip and could only bring a lens or maybe two. It would be a prime... and something like a Tamron AF18-270mm. The prime for awesome portraits/details and the all-in-one lens just so I wouldn't have to always be digging around in a bag.