Replacing my nifty 50.

RON_RIP

Senior Member
Well gang, my 50mm 1.8D is getting a little decrepit and the autofocus is beginning to stick. My problem is to decide what to replace it with. Should I go to the 50mm G series or should I just take a step back and use my 60mm 2.8D. I have long been an advocate of everyone having a nifty 50 and may now be a victim of my own rhetoric. Suggestions please.
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
Ron, I find myself reaching for my 60mm 2.8D... on an FX body... It gives me that normal walk around focal length, and the ability to get in close...
 
Well gang, my 50mm 1.8D is getting a little decrepit and the autofocus is beginning to stick. My problem is to decide what to replace it with. Should I go to the 50mm G series or should I just take a step back and use my 60mm 2.8D. I have long been an advocate of everyone having a nifty 50 and may now be a victim of my own rhetoric. Suggestions please.


With a DX camera the real "nifty 50" is really 35mm. But is is really what you are shooting that matters. The 50mm is in effect a 75mm lens so more of a portrait lens. I would try shooting with the 60mm for a while and see how you like it.
 

Bikerbrent

Senior Member
Since you have a 60 mm f2.8 lens and a DX body, I would consider one of the 35mm lenses as this will give you closer to a "nifity 50" on your D7000.
 

Marko

Senior Member
I'd second the 35mm, it's a superb lens, have always been impressed be it on D3100, D3300, D5100 and D5500. Very sharp, nice colour reproduction, smooth bokeh, reasonably quick focus (not a touch on the sigma arts) and super light :)
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
Depends on what you like shooting and your budget. Did the Chief Financial Officer tell you how much is available yet and if not cold you maybe do some extra chores?

The Sigma ART range have always been highly rated.
Tamron have come out with a series of similar f1.8 lenses and I have shot with the 45mm (yes strange focal distance) and MAN was it sharp! The sharpest lens I have ever used.

But may need to get going on those chores.
I'l post a link here in a minute as an edit because if I go looking now the system will log me out for being inactive.

Link to Amazon but I am sure you can get it elsewhere

From my experience with it I find it hard to believe there is anything under a 4 star review - but I guess we are all different. :)
 
Last edited:

RON_RIP

Senior Member
Depends on what you like shooting and your budget. Did the Chief Financial Officer tell you how much is available yet and if not cold you maybe do some extra chores?

The Sigma ART range have always been highly rated.
Tamron have come out with a series of similar f1.8 lenses and I have shot with the 45mm (yes strange focal distance) and MAN was it sharp! The sharpest lens I have ever used.

But may need to get going on those chores.
I'l post a link here in a minute as an edit because if I go looking now the system will log me out for being inactive.

Link to Amazon but I am sure you can get it elsewhere

From my experience with it I find it hard to believe there is anything under a 4 star review - but I guess we are all different. :)
Thanks Lawrence, there is only one camera shop left in Pittsburgh, but they do stock some Tamron items. If they have one I will look at it.
 

RON_RIP

Senior Member
Lots of interesting replies. Did get to try out the Nikon 50mm 1.8G and the 35mm 1.8G and was not that impressed with either one. If I wanted a 35mm i would probably favor the F2 35 mm autofocus from Nikon.
The 45mm Tamron 1.8 intrigues me even if @Lawrence is just tying to lure me into to spending a lot off money. It does make my short list. Another lens that impresses me is the manual focus Voigtlander 40mm. But I am somewhat concerned about it's small front element. It just seems to me that the more professional primes have large front elements. I would like to hear anyone else's thoughts on that.
I have been using my "Nifty 60" as a substitute for my 50mm and will probably continue to use that until I can afford something else. By taking one large step to the rear, I get essentially the same field of view as the 50mm and do not imagine that I will ever need to shoot at lower than f2.8. And, of course, the macro on the 60 is a definite plus when shooting flowers.
Many thanks to all who responded to this thread. Your comments have certainly caused me to think much harder on this than I might have done otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Top