Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 27, 2010, 6:02 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
rienz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Middle East
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombz View Post
but doesnt the the 35mm on my d3000 act like its a 50mm on a full frame or how does that work
Yes, 35mm will be equiv to 52.5mm on your D3000
If Auto focus is very important to you and if $100 is not a bit deal to you, then go with 35mm.
Having said that 50mm (on manual focus) will not dissappoint you.
Although I use only Canon gear, I prefer Nikon's 50mm f1.8 lens over the Canon version (which I have) even though the Canon version autofocuses on all Canon DSLR's.
__________________
Current Gear: Canon 7D+BG-E7 Battery Grip & 60D with EF 24-105 f/4 L IS; EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II; EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS; EF 100 f2.8 L IS; EF 50 f/1.8 II; Canon Speedlite 430 EX II; Metz 58 AF-1; Canon RC-5 Wireless Remote Controller & RS-80N3 Remote Switch; Manfrotto 190CX PRO4 with Manfrotto 322RC2 Grip Ball Head; Kenko Extension Tube Set; B+W UV & Polorizing filters
rienz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 9:49 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rienz View Post
For outdoor portraits you should be able to manual focus easily.
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 lens is an amazing and very affordable lens ... it is almost a crime not to own that lens.

Not if you don't use it. I guess i committed a crime by selling mine. I didn't find it to be a bad lens (i don't think it's amazing either), again for me it's an awkward focal length for my shooting. I tend not to shoot in the middle range...I'm mostly wide or telephoto.

Last edited by rjseeney; Nov 27, 2010 at 9:51 AM.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 2:12 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
zombz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: wolcott NY
Posts: 437
Default

well i was thinking of the 35mm for indoor portraits beacuse wouldnt a 50mm be like a 70mm on a full frame so id have to be kinda far away from the subject
zombz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 3:01 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

For portraits, you generally don't want to get too close.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2010, 3:06 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
zombz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: wolcott NY
Posts: 437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
For portraits, you generally don't want to get too close.
i understand this but in a smaller room it would be hard to focous the 50mm without like backing out of the room so i thought the 35mm would be better
zombz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 9:34 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombz View Post
i understand this but in a smaller room it would be hard to focous the 50mm without like backing out of the room so i thought the 35mm would be better
Again, it depends. 85 or 105 mm are considered the classic portrait lengths. You can get a little further away from the subject and get a more flattering perspective. So, a 50mm (with the crop factor) would be closest to the classic portrait focal length on a DSLR. As you say, in a smaller room this could be too long. However, you have to ask yourself, how many indoor portraits do you take in small rooms?? Probably not many. Even for large group shots, where this lens might be too long, how many large group shots do you do in small rooms (large groups tend not to gather in small rooms). If you're really into portraiture, the 50 would be a good choice, and an 85 would be better. The 35 is kinda of a compromise, do everything lens (kinda like the 50 used to be on film).

Really, the question you have to ask is how much portrait shooting do you do?? If it's only 5 or 10% of your shots, you'd probably be just as well off with a large aperture zoom like a 17-50 f 2.8, which is kind of the best of both worlds and offers more flexibility.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 3:19 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
zombz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: wolcott NY
Posts: 437
Default

Prob not many portraits bit im looking at doing a few here and there but im not a big on manual focusing so the 35 would be the cheapest af-s prime lens
zombz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 4:40 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombz View Post
Prob not many portraits bit im looking at doing a few here and there but im not a big on manual focusing so the 35 would be the cheapest af-s prime lens
So again, I ask, is it worth $190 to get a lens that isn't the best at a task you're not going to be doing much of. You've already likely got the focal length covered...you could get the SB600 flash for the same $190 which will do more to enhance your photography and be more useful in more situations.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 8:18 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
zombz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: wolcott NY
Posts: 437
Default

Yea I getting that flash and would my 18-55mm work out ok and just save the money for somthing else I have a 18-55mm and a 55-200mm nikon lens right now
zombz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2010, 9:09 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombz View Post
Yea I getting that flash and would my 18-55mm work out ok and just save the money for somthing else I have a 18-55mm and a 55-200mm nikon lens right now
For now probably yes. If you find those two lenses with the flash are still somewhat limiting in anyway then, you can make a more educated decision. Those are two decent lenses especially considering the price. Figure out how they may be holding you back before spending your cash. No need to spend money to solve a problem that you rarely encounter or could work around with a solution that fills multiple bills, like a flash.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:07 PM.