Which lens would you buy?

I'm considering 3 prime lenses for my D3200. I primarily want a prime lens for low-light, indoor photos. Here's what's up for consideration:

35mm f/1.8G dx $200
50mm f/1.8G fx $220
50mm f/1.4G fx $470

It doesn't seem like there would be much difference between the 35mm & 50mm lenses. Sure the focal lengths are different but why would I choose one over the other? And between the two 50mm lenses, why would I pay $250 more for a .4 difference in aperture? I'm banging my head right now & would appreciate some insight.

sigma 18-35 1.8 http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sigma-18-35-1-8

HotHits said:

sigma 18-35 1.8

Click to expand...

He has a point.

I going to say it again, the 50mm 1.8G is fantastic ! A tad sharper than the 1.4G , I guess the thing you need to ask yourself is what will you be shooting ? Ps I love my 50mm 1.8G

Option 1
As stated above the 18-35mm f1.8....It's not a prime...$870....
Option 2
Or you could buy the 35mm F1.8 g...50mm F1.8 g...then the 85mm AF-S F1.8 for about 30 dollars more..$900....Would be my choice

I have the 50mm D F1.8 and love it...

That would be a good combo pedroj !

I think any of them would work well. But if it were me an I had a limited budget but could buy the most expensive of your mentioned choices I would get the 35mm and the 50mm f:1.8 since together they are less than the 50mm f:1.4 . Lol
That way you get two good primes still in budget.

35mm Prime, it just nails the focus and sharpness every time. I have have never found the 50mm f/1.8 to be as reliable.

I would go 35mm. Mainly because you state for indoor use.

A. Sometimes you can't back up to get your shot and 50mm can be a bit close. This is especially true for indoor shots. The 50 is just a bit long for the average sized room.

B. You can almost always walk closer to your subject while indoors to make up the difference from 35mm to 50mm..

C. The 35mm has a slight edge over the 50mm in picture quality.

Also if you have the 18-55 kit lens just go around the house snapping at 35 and 50. The pictures don't have to be anything special. Just get a general idea of the limits of each focal length. Then purchase what you seem to use the most.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

^^ that's surprising. I have both 1.8's and can't say I prefer one over the other when it come to focus or sharpness.

It's not that I'm calling the 50mm a bad lens, but with the 35mm I could seemingly close my eyes and the lens just nails it. With my 50mm I just can't call it reliable. It was like my days of writing/reviewing products with early digital cameras, we all operated under the rule that you always shoot three of every photo because they just weren't reliable enough (sharp in entirely in focus) and you HAD to have the picture and wouldn't be repeatable at a later time. I do the same with my 50mm. It's burned me when it matters.

35mm 1.8 is my most used lens, if I could only have one this would be it.

I have not tried the others though

Since it is about indoors,then the 35 might be the best suitable, 50 mm might be too long at times. One should be aware about a slightly higher chromatic aberration on the 35mm than the average, other than that the lens it it very sharp, lightweight, easy to work with.
When it comes down to the 50mm the body should be considered too. If no motor then then G is a must, otherwise the 1.8D is a very good choice.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Of the three listed, I too would have to side with the 35mm f1.8G, and for all the usual reasons: It's light, it's fast, it's flexible, it's sharp.

I like the Sigma 18-35mm, I suppose, but I know for a fact I don't like it's price tag.

For DX, I'd get the 35. 50mm has been the standard issue prime since I started shooting back in the 70s. With your camera, a 35mm gives you the approximate focal length of a nifty fifty.

HotHits said:

sigma 18-35 1.8 http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sigma-18-35-1-8

Click to expand...

Me too!!!

Bill16 said:

IBut if it were me an I had a limited budget but could buy the most expensive of your mentioned choices I would get the 35mm and the 50mm f:1.8 since together they are less than the 50mm f:1.4 . Lol

Click to expand...

That's what I'd do as well. However, if I had to choose one, I choose the 35. The 50 has the field of view of 75 on DX so is less useful in general shooting than the 35. my opinion of course.

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments. All are helpful & seem to lean towards the 35mm for sensible reasons and it's an inexpensive lens.

I'm still curious as to why there is such a price difference between the two 50mm lenses (f/1.4G vs. f/1.8G) that I mention above. I've only been a hobby photographer for a year and I struggle to understand the technical differences between seemingly similar lenses that vary greatly in price. (Even if I don't buy either lens, I'd like to know)

Jillspinsaround said:

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments. All are helpful & seem to lean towards the 35mm for sensible reasons and it's an inexpensive lens.

I'm still curious as to why there is such a price difference between the two 50mm lenses (f/1.4G vs. f/1.8G) that I mention above. I've only been a hobby photographer for a year and I struggle to understand the technical differences between seemingly similar lenses that vary greatly in price. (Even if I don't buy either lens, I'd like to know)

Click to expand...

A 1.4 lens is a little better in low light than a 1.8 and that slighty wider aperture is more difficult to make so it comes at a price.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

35 1.8 FOR dx