Nikon 35mm; 50mm; 85mm Article

[MPSanSouci]

A few days back, I came across an article that had both the Nikon 50mm and 85mm for sale and at the same cost. The author compared the two and also made a suggestion. The author stated that though the 50mm is a good prime lens, he recommended the 85mm and a 35mm. The 85mm for telephoto and the 35mm for wide angle shooting.

Does anyone happen to know about this article? I am very interested in re-reading it for my own knowledge since I can no longer find it.

On another note, does anyone have their own personal preference regarding the two or all three lenses? I am always open for comments, ideas, and suggestions.

I have been interested in building my 'lens collection' for various shoots with low-light options available to me. I find shooting at night a very rewarding experience .. when I can stay up long enough to shoot at those late hours.

Michael

 

[Horoscope Fish]

While I'm not familiar with the article you're talking about, I do happen to have both the 35mm f/1.8G and the 85mm f/1.8G and I think it's a winning combination. The 35mm is good for just about everything but is definitely my go-to lens for shooting indoors. It's so light and easy to work with you forget it's there and the image quality is stunning.

The 85mm was, at first, a bit difficult for me to work with because there was more magnification than I think I was expecting. But, as I typically do, I put the lens on my camera and forced myself to shoot with only that lens until I felt comfortable with it. I'm much further along that road and I'm really loving the 85 f/1.8 now. Between the image quality and the bokeh, this lens takes the most beautiful shots of any lens I have. I wish it was a little less bulky, but that's just a personal nit-pick of mine.

The 50mm f/1.8 is an outstanding lens, there's simply no two ways about it. I simply find 50mm on a DX a little awkward to use. I'm sure if I shot with it long enough we'd find our comfort zone but right now, the 35/85 combo is rocking my world.

I think in large part it's not so much a matter of one thing or situation being *better* than another, it's about learning to use what you have. As I'm fond of saying, at some point you have to stop asking yourself, "What lens do I need to get the shot I want?" and start asking yourself, "How do I get the shot I want, with the lens I have?" One path leads to better creative thinking and subsequently better photography, the other leads to an expensive case of NAS.

......

 

[donaldjledet]

I also have both the 35 and 85. I couldn't be happier. They both do everything very good . Most of my photos are taken with them.

 

[Pretzel]

The 50mm f/1.8 is an outstanding lens, there's simply no two ways about it. I simply find 50mm on a DX a little awkward to use. I'm sure if I shot with it long enough we'd find our comfort zone but right now, the 35/85 combo is rocking my world.

I think in large part it's not so much a matter of one thing or situation being *better* than another, it's about learning to use what you have. As I'm fond of saying, at some point you have to stop asking yourself, "What lens do I need to get the shot I want?" and start asking yourself, "How do I get the shot I want, with the lens I have?" One path leads to better creative thinking and subsequently better photography, the other leads to an expensive case of NAS.

Agreed, re: the "learning to use what you have" bit. I don't have the 35 or the 85, but DO have the 50 1.8G, and I can use it in quite a few situations because I've taken the time to learn it. I've found it to be both a workable landscape lens, a fantastic portrait lens, an AMAZING low light lens, etc., and I can't imagine taking a trip without it. Between it and my 70-300 VR, I could survive. I do still get the 18-55mm kit lens out when I have VERY limited space, or want to get closer than a foot away from something and keep it in focus, but that's rare.

I see you've got the 70-300 and the 50mm already, along with the same kit lens, so do this... set your kit lens to about 35mm and leave it there all day (maybe even a few) as you shoot a lot of pics. That will help you get a feel for the range and what kind of maneuvering you're going to have to do with that focal length. Then, for the next few days, set your 70-300 at about 85mm and do the same. THEN... (a lot of work, yes, I know) get back out and try to duplicate some of the shots with the 50mm and see if it's workable or if you really do need the other primes.

With that kind of research, you'll soon know if it's a NEED thing to purchase one or both primes, or more of a case of NAS. In fact, now that you've mentioned the other two primes, and I have the other two lenses as well, I think I've just assigned myself a few project days now, too! Time to have some fun!

 

[Rick M]

I've had all three and rarely used the 50mm. I don't know why, but I just don't shoot much between 35-70mm. That may change when the 24-70 f2 Sigma comes out

 

[MPSanSouci]

Pretzel,

I do love my 70-300mm. This is the lens that stays on most of the time .. almost a fixed fixture on the camera. I never did think about your suggestion taking the 70-300mm and setting it for 85mm .. and the same for the 18-55mm. Common sense is lacking in the Northeast

My only concern is the low-light conditions. I do love my night-time shoots! That is where I was considering the 85mm. I do like how the pictures come out using my 70-300mm and was curious if using a fixed lens would give me better quality shots .. or as most say "it's the photographer and not the equipment". I do play a lot and that's how I found my 'turn-ons'.
_________________

Horoscope Fish,

I have come to appreciate your posts and comments. You do 'break things down' so the end-user understands what you are says and experience weighs in a lot!!!

Thank you!!!
_________________

I did come across another article regarding this subject. I find it funny that once I get into a subject, I end up stumbling upon a lot of information regarding it. This article breaks down three Nikon different lenses .. 28mm, 50mm, and the 85mm

First Nikon Lens?

http://photographylife.com/first-nikon-lens#utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=first-nikon-lens

Happy Shooting to All!! And 'Thank You' for all of your input!

Michael

 

[ShootRaw]

I like the 50mm 1.8g over the Nikons 35 1.8g....Now the Sigma art 1.4 35mm is on my radar...Sharpest 35mm on the D7100 Body

 

[solberg2004]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and landscape shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect backround into my photos.

Also are either of the above lens adequate for shooting subjects in motion ie. cars?

​

 

[carguy]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and landscape shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect backround into my photos.

Also are either of the above lens adequate for shooting subjects in motion ie. cars?

​

For portraits, I'd pick the 50mm over the 35mm due to distortion. For the other types of shooting, either will work well.

Tapp'n on the go

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Hi all. I have a D3100 just over a year now with the 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR lenses. I am looking at adding another lens to my kit.
There is two i am looking at: AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G and the AF-S DX Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G.
I am looking for advice on which of the two is the best to go for. Ideally i want a lens for portrait and landscape shots and being able to define sharpness and blurred effect background into my photos.

Also are either of the above lens adequate for shooting subjects in motion ie. cars?​

The 35mm vs. 50mm lens debate rages on and both sides have good arguments in support of their side. Simply put, the 15mm difference between the two lenses is simply *NOT* a deal breaker in any practical sense. We could all re-hash the whole DX vs. FX perspective thing but that just muddies the water with yet another meaningless comparison (if you're not familiar with the particulars of the FX vs DX format debate, count a blessing but, on the flip side of that coin, neither should you worry about this gaping hole in your photographic knowledge base because SOMEONE will simply NOT be able to resist bringing this "argument" to the table).

The short answer to your question is that both the 35mm focal length AND the 50mm focal length are GREAT focal lengths to have and neither of the lenses in question is inherently superior to the other; they will both provide you excellent bokeh, both are fast at f/1.8 and both will provide you with excellent sharpness. Buy one, buy the other, buy them both. They're both really good lenses.

Lastly, the 85mm f/1.8G is, in my opinion, a really *fantastic* lens.

.....​

 

[ShootRaw]

50mm 1.8g all day long....Sharper then the 35mm and better focal for portaits(75mm)

 

[solberg2004]

Thanks guys. I think myself i am inching more towards the 50mm lens as i can see myself getting the better use from it than the 35mm especially when it comes to sports shots which i have in mind for aswell as portrait.

 

[ShootRaw]

Here is a shot with my 50mm 1.8g

Click on pic for sharpness..

 

[ShootRaw]

Not on the D7100 it's not. Not according to DXO Mark, anyway, where the 35mm f/1.8G scores four points higher than the 50mm f/1.8G on the D7100: 26 vs. 22 points, respectively. And four points on DXO is significant.



The 50mm prime is not a portrait lens; it's simply too short a focal length for portraiture.

.....

It is 14mp versus 13mp in sharpness(compared to the 35mm)..The points are for total scoring..
50mm on dx is a portrait lens(75mm)...The 85mm 1.8g is the best between the 2(127mm) Better compression

 

[Horoscope Fish]

It is 14mp versus 13mp in sharpness(compared to the 35mm)..The points are for total scoring..
50mm on dx is a portrait lens(75mm)...The 85mm 1.8g is the best between the 2(127mm) Better compression

Which is why I deleted my original post, I wanted to point out that while 1mp of sharpness is negligible, four points overall is significant by DXO Mark standards.

And the 50mm is only 75mm when compared to a DX sensor which is a pointless comparison. We could just as easily compare it to Micro 4/3 but no one draws that comparison because it's equally null. A 50mm lens on a DX sensor is simply not a 75mm tele.

.....

 

[ShootRaw]

We all have dx sensors..So how do you dispute the focal of 75mm...It is a 75mm on dx..Portrait territory..Look at the pic I posted(with the 50mm)..proof is in the pudding..Here is a shot with the 35mm 1.8g I use to own

 

[Marcel]

We all have dx sensors..So how do you dispute the focal of 75mm...It is a 75mm on dx..Portrait territory..Look at the pic I posted..proof is in the pudding..

A 50 mm lens is a 50 mm lens wherever you put it. A 50 mm lens on a cropped sensor will give you the same "Field of View" of a 75mm that would be on a full frame sensor. But it's still a 50mm lens.

 

[ShootRaw]

There is no distortion of a 50mm 1.8g on the dx bodies like there would be on an fx body..I agree the 50mm on fx is not a portrait lens.

 

[carguy]

Here we go again lol

Tapp'n on the go

 

[Marcel]

There is no distortion of a 50mm 1.8g on the dx bodies like there would be on an fx body..I agree the 50mm on fx is not a portrait lens.

That's only because to get the same crop with the DX you'll have to backup and THAT is what would change the field of view, not the lens.