If I purchased a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G ED AS-S Nikkor wide angle zoom lens, would the purchase of a AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4G just be purchasing a capability already covered by the zoom lens, or is there an advantage (other than weight) the 50mm offers which is not not offered by the zoom lens?
prime lens or zoom lens?
- Thread starter Dodger
- Start date
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Not enough difference to make the purchase worthwhile, IMO. Sure the f/1.4 would be faster and lighter but...
I love me a good prime, they're great tools to have, but I can't call this essential in light (ha!) of you already having the 24-70mm. Sharpness, according to DXO mark is within a couple points of one another so that's not too compelling in my opinion.
....
There is a big difference in low light when it comes to f2.8 and f1.8, so f1.4 would be even better, and for that alone I would consider prime lens.
But, I am not sure about everything else because 50mm f1.8 D for example is very soft below f5.6, and chromatic aberration is horrible, so it is much worse than my Sigma 17-50 f2.8 zoom, no matter it is a prime lens.
Of course, you can not compare cheap D lens with 50mm f1.4, but if you want to buy it for anything else than low light capabilities I think it is too expensive. But, that is subjective...
If this is my money, I will buy Sigma 18-35 f1.8, which is very sharp lens, so you get more at wide end and more light as well.
But, I am not sure about everything else because 50mm f1.8 D for example is very soft below f5.6, and chromatic aberration is horrible, so it is much worse than my Sigma 17-50 f2.8 zoom, no matter it is a prime lens.
Of course, you can not compare cheap D lens with 50mm f1.4, but if you want to buy it for anything else than low light capabilities I think it is too expensive. But, that is subjective...
If this is my money, I will buy Sigma 18-35 f1.8, which is very sharp lens, so you get more at wide end and more light as well.
Ruidoso Bill
Senior Member
I have both lenses and one would be hard pressed to see the difference at 50mm on the zoom. The 24-70 is much larger and heavier but I would never trade the versatility of the zoom. The speed of the 50 is great but modern cameras offset that with great high iso performance.
Last edited:
It all depends on what and where you shoot.
A zoom is invaluable for general photography in good light (or with a flash). It is versatile but at the expense of weight. A prime on other hand is a light lense, excellent for low light or good OOF rendering.
At around F6 there is hardly any difference in sharpness between primes and professional zooms, but the prime scores when you want a light package and shooting in low light without a flash. I do most of my indoor photography with the 35mm F1.8DX, The zooms are there when versatility of zoom will help and when the light is good (or a flash is feasible).
A zoom is invaluable for general photography in good light (or with a flash). It is versatile but at the expense of weight. A prime on other hand is a light lense, excellent for low light or good OOF rendering.
At around F6 there is hardly any difference in sharpness between primes and professional zooms, but the prime scores when you want a light package and shooting in low light without a flash. I do most of my indoor photography with the 35mm F1.8DX, The zooms are there when versatility of zoom will help and when the light is good (or a flash is feasible).