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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 2, 2011, 5:11 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 33
Default Primes: 50mm vs 35 mm and G vs D

Hey guys,

Thinking about getting a prime for my D7000.
I currently only own the kit 18-105 lens.
It's nice but everyone raves about the quality of primes and how they're usefull to evolve your photography and since the camera always wants to flash my baby indoors (stop it) i think using a prime might help.

Besides photos of the child i would also use it for portraits of adults, and outdoors aswell.

So the question is 35mm or 50mm? I've tests both distances on my current lens and i quickly came to the conclusion (is it wrong?) that i could always walk the 35mm into a closer "50mm" crop while at 50mm sometimes you can't step back enough to fit everything in the frame.

But what about image quality of both lenses, distortion on the 35mm? bokeh quality etc.
and differences between the D model and the newer (more expensive) G?

So do i go for the cheaper 50mm 1.8D?
Or do should i go for the 35mm 1.8G? or for the similar priced 50mm 1.8G?

Price range wise the 1.4s are a little too expensive for me atm.
orion318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 2, 2011, 9:32 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The 50 G has a lot less vignetting that the other two, especially the 35. The 50 D has less chromatic aberration, but not by much and only at smaller apertures. The 35 is sharper, followed by the 50 G.

See SLRGear.com's test results:
Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Nikkor (Tested)
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor (Tested)
Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S Nikkor (Tested)

For portraits, and especially baby pictures, I think 35mm is too short. I think you'll find yourslef doing a lot of cropping and/or getting perspective distortion.
__________________
  • 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 Oct 2, 2011, 12:16 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
tjsnaps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Posts: 652
Default

Even the 50mm is a bit short for portraits, though usable. I still use my old manual focus primes on my D5000 when I want a large aperture. If money is an issue you can pick them up cheap then update the focal lengths you really like later on. On a D7000 you would still be able to meter, though focusing takes some practice on a DX camera.
tjsnaps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2011, 3:55 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Back in the film days, the rule of thumb for portraits was that the focal length should be from 85mm to 135mm. This gave the proper perspective, without you having to be too far away.

With an APS-C sensor, in order to get the same perspective, you'd need a focal length of from 57mm to 92mm. 50mm is short for head-and-shoulders portraits, but for 1/3 to 1/2 body shots, it's ok. YOu can confirm that by setting the focal length of your 18-105, just to be sure.
__________________
  • 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 Oct 3, 2011, 6:34 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 33
Default

So would it be worth it to go with a 50mm 1.4 D instead of a 1.8G? it's only about 50 more expensive so not really that much.
orion318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2011, 7:11 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orion318 View Post
So would it be worth it to go with a 50mm 1.4 D instead of a 1.8G? it's only about 50 more expensive so not really that much.

Hi,

This review written by Thom Hogan may help in explaining why a faster lens - i.e. a 50mm 1.4 does a better job of isolating the subject when taking portrait shots making it a preferable choice. Also, why you might want to choose a 50mm prime over a 35mm prime.

http://bythom.com/Sigma-50-HSM-lensreview.htm

Hope this helps.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 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 1:47 PM.