Steve'sDigicams

mitobito · Jan 10, 2007, 4:45 PM

I just received my new D50 with 18-55mm and I am havinga great time figuring it all out.

I received some gift cards ($200) and am trying to decide what to purchase next. Options...

50mm 1.8 (I havereadthis is a great "cheap" lens)plus editing software (photoshop elements or Nikon Capture)

or

External Flash SB-600

What would be the best way to go?

rey · Jan 10, 2007, 5:34 PM

I would get a longer lens first, either 55-200 or 70-300 range. If you shoot a lot of indoors, I would buy the flash next. And then the 50/1.8.

For software, there are free stuff out there. But getting the Elements 5.0 is probably worth it if you shoot NEF.

rjseeney · Jan 11, 2007, 11:42 AM

Definitely spend some more time with the 18-55 and figure out it's limitations. Base your next purchase on where you feel the 18-55 falls short. Likely, a longer lens will be the first thing you'll want. The Sb600 (or 800 if you've got the extra cash) is a great addition, and when used properly can add alot to your images. The 50 f1.8 is cheap and readily available, and nice to have, although I own it and don't use it all that much, as it's a bit long for indoors.

stevem1928 · Jan 12, 2007, 5:17 PM

What is considered to be a good price for the 50mm 1.8?

rey · Jan 12, 2007, 11:13 PM

stevem1928 wrote:

Quote:

What is considered to be a good price for the 50mm 1.8?

I got mine for $110 from adorama 9 months ago. I've seen this as low as $105 and as high as $125. B&H have them for $115 and KEH has a new one for $109.

Note that the *current* version is 50mm F/1.8D.

On a side note, there was a rumor a few months ago that Nikon will discontinue the currently version, and possibly replace it with something else (maybe ED glass), but I haven't read anything since.

stevem1928 · Jan 13, 2007, 9:57 AM

I have been considering getting the 50mm 1.8 lens for some time. I currently have an 18 - 200mm f3.5-6.5. I am looking to reduce the depth of field on my photos.

Does anyone have a set of comparison photos with one picture taken with 50mm 1.8 and the same subject with something like 50mm 3.5? I am wondering how big of difference there is in the depth of field.

stevem1928 · Jan 13, 2007, 10:09 AM

Oh, back to the original poster's question;

Photoshop Elelments would be a good investment for the money. I personally use the full version of PS ($600). I have helped some friends who have Elements. I am impressed with what they pack into such a cheap version of PS.

I have experimented with a friends $300 flash for the D50. I could not seem to get my pictures to look a whole lot better with it. A lot of it depends on how and where you use the flash. Most of my flash pictures are taken in the house. I could not see much difference in confined spaces, even when using the bounce feature. However, it made a world of difference when taking pictures at my sisters graduation. No one else around me, (including others with expensive dSLR cameras without external flashes) pictures turned out. They were too dark. The on camera flashes did not go far enough. We were about 100' from the stage, and flash made all of the difference. It was worth its weight in gold for that situation. I also had fun using the slave function on the flash (using the oncamera flash to fire the flash off of the camera). It can make for some creative looking stuff, fun- but not necessary for my needs.

ReneB3 · Jan 14, 2007, 7:34 AM

stevem1928 wrote:

Quote:

Does anyone have a set of comparison photos with one picture taken with 50mm 1.8 and the same subject with something like 50mm 3.5? I am wondering how big of difference there is in the depth of field.

The difference in depth of field is huge. I have a 1.4 and for portraits I can get the nose and eyes in focus but the ear will be soft. I will post one latter. 1.8 is not that much different.

rey · Jan 14, 2007, 12:25 PM

You can use a dof calculator to get an idea:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

But looking at the formula on wikipedia, it looks like for closeup distances, the F/1.8 will have half the depth of field of F/3.6, since the F-number ratio for these two specific numbers is 1-to-2. Depending on your subject's size, this difference could be huge.

labrat99 · Jan 14, 2007, 12:40 PM

I would recommend getting the 50mm f1.8 lens next, although it really depends a lot on what tyoe of shooting you like to do. I've got three lenses for my D50 - 18-70, 70-300, and 50mm. Of the three the 50mm or the 18-70 are mounted over 90% of the time. I VERY rarely shoot with the 70-300. Someone whose interest is in wildlife photography may have just the opposite experience.

One plus for the 50mm f1.8 is that filters are readily available and less expensive than for larger diameter lenses. I've added star filters, ND filters, close-up lenses, etc. to my kit that fit the 50mm and have had a blast toying with them and seeing how they affect an image.

Finally, because of the 1.5x crop factor on your D50 the 50mm makes a very decent extremely low-cost portrait lens.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Jan 10, 2007, 4:45 PM	#1
mitobito Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 3	I just received my new D50 with 18-55mm and I am havinga great time figuring it all out. I received some gift cards ($200) and am trying to decide what to purchase next. Options... 50mm 1.8 (I havereadthis is a great "cheap" lens)plus editing software (photoshop elements or Nikon Capture) or External Flash SB-600 What would be the best way to go?

Jan 10, 2007, 5:34 PM	#2
rey Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 949	I would get a longer lens first, either 55-200 or 70-300 range. If you shoot a lot of indoors, I would buy the flash next. And then the 50/1.8. For software, there are free stuff out there. But getting the Elements 5.0 is probably worth it if you shoot NEF.

Jan 11, 2007, 11:42 AM	#3
rjseeney Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky Posts: 2,398	Definitely spend some more time with the 18-55 and figure out it's limitations. Base your next purchase on where you feel the 18-55 falls short. Likely, a longer lens will be the first thing you'll want. The Sb600 (or 800 if you've got the extra cash) is a great addition, and when used properly can add alot to your images. The 50 f1.8 is cheap and readily available, and nice to have, although I own it and don't use it all that much, as it's a bit long for indoors.

Jan 12, 2007, 5:17 PM	#4
stevem1928 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 112	What is considered to be a good price for the 50mm 1.8?

Jan 13, 2007, 9:57 AM	#6
stevem1928 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 112	I have been considering getting the 50mm 1.8 lens for some time. I currently have an 18 - 200mm f3.5-6.5. I am looking to reduce the depth of field on my photos. Does anyone have a set of comparison photos with one picture taken with 50mm 1.8 and the same subject with something like 50mm 3.5? I am wondering how big of difference there is in the depth of field.

Jan 13, 2007, 10:09 AM	#7
stevem1928 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 112	Oh, back to the original poster's question; Photoshop Elelments would be a good investment for the money. I personally use the full version of PS ($600). I have helped some friends who have Elements. I am impressed with what they pack into such a cheap version of PS. I have experimented with a friends $300 flash for the D50. I could not seem to get my pictures to look a whole lot better with it. A lot of it depends on how and where you use the flash. Most of my flash pictures are taken in the house. I could not see much difference in confined spaces, even when using the bounce feature. However, it made a world of difference when taking pictures at my sisters graduation. No one else around me, (including others with expensive dSLR cameras without external flashes) pictures turned out. They were too dark. The on camera flashes did not go far enough. We were about 100' from the stage, and flash made all of the difference. It was worth its weight in gold for that situation. I also had fun using the slave function on the flash (using the oncamera flash to fire the flash off of the camera). It can make for some creative looking stuff, fun- but not necessary for my needs.

Jan 14, 2007, 12:25 PM	#9
rey Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 949	You can use a dof calculator to get an idea: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html But looking at the formula on wikipedia, it looks like for closeup distances, the F/1.8 will have half the depth of field of F/3.6, since the F-number ratio for these two specific numbers is 1-to-2. Depending on your subject's size, this difference could be huge.

Jan 14, 2007, 12:40 PM	#10
labrat99 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 38	I would recommend getting the 50mm f1.8 lens next, although it really depends a lot on what tyoe of shooting you like to do. I've got three lenses for my D50 - 18-70, 70-300, and 50mm. Of the three the 50mm or the 18-70 are mounted over 90% of the time. I VERY rarely shoot with the 70-300. Someone whose interest is in wildlife photography may have just the opposite experience. One plus for the 50mm f1.8 is that filters are readily available and less expensive than for larger diameter lenses. I've added star filters, ND filters, close-up lenses, etc. to my kit that fit the 50mm and have had a blast toying with them and seeing how they affect an image. Finally, because of the 1.5x crop factor on your D50 the 50mm makes a very decent extremely low-cost portrait lens.