Fixed 50mm lens

Hi
I am thinking of getting a Nikon 50mm lens, I currently have a Nikon 18-55, a Tamron 18-200 and a Tamron 70-300.
My question is would I benefit from a fixed 50mm and if so in what way?
Sorry if it seems a bit of a daft question but having just forked out for my D7200 I don't want to pay out for one if it's not really necessary.
Thanks in advance.

Jack

Just because we say so. But seriously, it is a much sharper lens and capable of low light photography. Having to zoom in and out with your feet causes you to pay more intention to your framing and some days it's low weight just makes t a blessing to lug around.

50mm are generally the sharpest, highest-IQ lenses you can get. They aren't called 'nifty fifity's' for nuttin'.
It will also be a 'faster' lens, meaning you'll have a nice bright viewfinder to look at, be able to shoot in lower light and your AF will have fewer problems in low light.
When shooting wide open, you can command razor-thin DOF.
50 primes are über-light and über-small. Perfect for when size & weight are a primary consideration.
And primes are generally better when it comes to all the optical compromises that are inflicted on your lenses.... less flare, distortion, chromatic abberations, et al.

A 50 should be in everyone's bag.

Jack... Welcome to the forum...

Please take this as constructive advice. If you don't know, and/or can't articulate the reasons why you NEED a 50mm prime, then you probably don't need it. You already own 2 lenses that cover that focal length...

The only justification you could possibly make is if you shoot a lot at the 50mm focal length using the two lenses you have, AND you find yourself using higher than normal ISOs as a result of low light situations... There are other less significant reasons, but none that can't be had with your existing lenses...

Jack Luxford said:

Hi
I am thinking of getting a Nikon 50mm lens, I currently have a Nikon 18-55, a Tamron 18-200 and a Tamron 70-300.
My question is would I benefit from a fixed 50mm and if so in what way?
Sorry if it seems a bit of a daft question but having just forked out for my D7200 I don't want to pay out for one if it's not really necessary.
Thanks in advance.

Jack

Click to expand...

Well it's not "necessary" in that you already have the 50mm focal length covered.

I don't know if you'll benefit from one or not because I don't know how you shoot or how you feel about your photography. I can tell you I like prime lenses because they change how I need to do things when I'm shooting; they involve me more in the process. They make me move more and think more and experiment more with different angles and perspectives. That they also tend to be fantastically sharp, fast-shooting and light, are all just icing on the cake for me. I will also say that I prefer the 35mm focal length over the 50mm on a DX body because, obviously, it's a bit wider which is nice when shooting indoors. I can always crop to a 50mm perspective using the 35' if I need to, but I can't widen a shot taken with the 50'. Still, nothing wrong with the 50' and many people do prefer them.
.....

FredKingston said:

Jack... Welcome to the forum...

Please take this as constructive advice. If you don't know, and/or can't articulate the reasons why you NEED a 50mm prime, then you probably don't need it. You already own 2 lenses that cover that focal length...

Click to expand...

This is the reason for asking the question FredKingston.. Do I NEED a 50mm? I have read that they may produce sharper images than a zoom lens and having never tried one I thought I would ask before plunging in and buying one. I sometimes think my images could be sharper so was kind of hoping this could help with my 'straight out of the camera' images.

Jack Luxford said:

This is the reason for asking the question FredKingston.. Do I NEED a 50mm? I have read that they may produce sharper images than a zoom lens and having never tried one I thought I would ask before plunging in and buying one. I sometimes think my images could be sharper so was kind of hoping this could help with my 'straight out of the camera' images.

Click to expand...

Welcome to Nikonites Jack,

Getting sharper images could be attained in many ways. If you don't have a tripod and use it regularly, then it could get you sharper images. How are you post processing your images? Most digital pictures are sharpened in post production (Lightroom or Photoshop, or other softwares).

A sharp image starts with a steady camera when you take the pictures. A 50 mm can help there as you can get faster shutter speed to prevent camera shake.

Now since you are asking, it means that you probably could go without it for a while. At some point, you will know that you need it, then it will be time to get it.

Good luck and enjoy your Nikon.

< I will also say that I prefer the 35mm focal length over the 50mm on a DX body because, obviously, it's a bit wider which is nice when shooting indoors. I can always crop to a 50mm perspective using the 35' if I need to, but I can't widen a shot taken with the 50'. >

So that I am clear on this, a 35mm mounted on a DX yields the same perspective that a 50mm does mounted on an FX, right?

What Marcel said...

The 50mm F1.8 is the first lens that I ever bought when I went digital 8 or 10 years ago. For me when I started with the crop sensor cameras it was just a little too long for me. I know a lot of people are crazy about this lens but for me it is by far the least use lens I own. Maybe now that a also own a full frame it might be worth trying again. Everyone has different tastes and shooting styles but for me in all the years I have owned this lens I probably have not taken over 30 or 40 images with it. It is a very sharp lens but it just isn't a focal length I use much. If I were to get a prime lens for a crop sensor it would probably be the 35mm. In my humble opinion I would use what you have and spend the money on something else since you already have that focal length covered.

Sandpatch said:

< I will also say that I prefer the 35mm focal length over the 50mm on a DX body because, obviously, it's a bit wider which is nice when shooting indoors. I can always crop to a 50mm perspective using the 35' if I need to, but I can't widen a shot taken with the 50'. >

So that I am clear on this, a 35mm mounted on a DX yields the same perspective that a 50mm does mounted on an FX, right?

Click to expand...

Well, yes and no, because perspective is not a function of focal length. The Field of View of a 35mm lens on an DX body equates to 52.5mm on an FX body. I don't mean to be pedantic, but perspective and FoV really are two different things.
....

I think the nikkor 50mm and the nikkor 35mm are both worth having and cheap to buy at that, compared to most other good lenses!

Bill16 said:

I think the nikkor 50mm and the nikkor 35mm are both worth having and cheap to buy at that, compared to most other good lenses!

Click to expand...

I totally agree. I got both and the 40mm as well. All three a great lenses and each of them to a great job. I use all of them for different purposes and every time I achieved the result I was looking for.

If you would like sharper images and better low light capability with more OOF in your images, get both the 50mm F1.8D and the 35mm F1.8G DX. Each one will set you back by less than $150 (even less if you look out for deals).

I use 35mm DX extensively for both street shooting and in low light at F1.8, an aperture not available on most zooms.

Another superb 50mm lens is the 50mm F1.2 AIS lens. It is decades old design, still in production. Fantastic OOF and bokeh at F1.2, and one of the sharpest at F2.

I have a 50 1.4 on my D7100 as we speak. While I haven't shot too many images with the "new" (bought used at B&H) lens, initial results are fantastic. And the weight reduction over the 18-140 is very noticeable already. Still love the 18-140, but for a walk around lens, the 50 1.4 just feels right.

aroy said:

If you would like sharper images and better low light capability with more OOF in your images, get both the 50mm F1.8D and the 35mm F1.8G DX. Each one will set you back by less than $150 (even less if you look out for deals).

I use 35mm DX extensively for both street shooting and in low light at F1.8, an aperture not available on most zooms.

Another superb 50mm lens is the 50mm F1.2 AIS lens. It is decades old design, still in production. Fantastic OOF and bokeh at F1.2, and one of the sharpest at F2.

Click to expand...

Ditto.... I bought myself a 50mm f1.2 AIS a while back and it's veeeeery nice, got it from a shop in Tokyo...about $400 from memory, it takes me back to "the old days" of my photography and I love it for a "walking around" lens.
Maybe try borrowing one to try if that's possible, and go from there, I wish you all the best with whatever you end up getting.
cheers

I have the 35mm f1.8G, and the 50mm f1.8D - Both are awesome lenses.. Light, sharp and cheap. It is very likely that if you get either of these primes, you will rarely use your 18-55 again.

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to reply. I've got a 50mm on the way based on your replies and what I intend using it for..

Sandpatch said:

< I will also say that I prefer the 35mm focal length over the 50mm on a DX body because, obviously, it's a bit wider which is nice when shooting indoors. I can always crop to a 50mm perspective using the 35' if I need to, but I can't widen a shot taken with the 50'. >

So that I am clear on this, a 35mm mounted on a DX yields the same perspective that a 50mm does mounted on an FX, right?

Click to expand...

No. It yields a roughly equivalent field of view. FOV and perspective are totally separate animals.

Thank you Horoscope Fish and Sparky480 for your answer to my 35mm DX vs 50mm FX question. I'll have to read up on Perspective vs Field of View. There are times when I wish I owned fixed lenses like these, as I did in my 35mm film days. I miss them.