choosing between 35mm and 50mm primes for D5100

Hello there!

I was taking pictures with my friend the other day using her EOS60D and 50mm F1.8 prime lens. It was my first time using a prime, and I absolutely loves it's sharpness, Depth of Field, and the way it blew the background waaay out of focus compared to my kit lens! SO I wanna invest on a prime lens.

The question is since D5100 has a crop factor of 1.5, 35mm lens becomes almost equivalent to 50mm. What is your recommendation? I don't want it to use solely for portraits, but if I need, I'd like to get a good portrait shot as well. I feel like 35mm would be a better all around lens for D5100 than 50mm. What is your opinion? thanks!

You answered your question. I would get a 35mm.

From my Galaxy S2 (Tapatalk 2)

They cost so little that you should get both. The 35 for groups of full length shots and the 50 for portraits. Don't forget that the EOS60D is also a cropped sensor body, so the 50 you'd get would give you almost the same as what you liked with your friend's camera although canons are 1.6 compared to 1.5 for Nikons.

Thank you both for your answers. Well since my budget is limited, I can afford only one. Do you think I can't get such good shots with 35 compared to 50? Say if I get a bit closer to the subject for portrait, and just other situations in general

I think the 35 might be a little more versatile for general use, but for portraits I prefer the 50 on a cropped sensor (DX). You can get closer with the 35 to frame a little tighter, but there is a little bit of unnatural distortion that makes the face look strange. Give it a try with your zoom at these different focal lengths and you'll see what I mean.

Follow what Marcel said

From my Galaxy S2 (Tapatalk 2)

Something different to think about with your kit lens outside if you bring your subject away from the backgroud you can blur it...I think Canon's 60D sensor has a crop of 1.6

If I could get only one, between the 35 and 50, I'd get the 40mm Micro! Very sharp and you can experiment with macro at the same time!

Whenever I see a discussion regarding lenses, I feel like having them all. But I have to stop for quite some time before investing any further, lol.
I want 35mm, 70-300mm and a macro lens, lol. I think I won't be stopping with 70-300mm and may want to go farther with the zoom, hahaha.....
Now, am realizing, why this is considered a costliest hobby

Kamesh said:

Whenever I see a discussion regarding lenses, I feel like having them all. But I have to stop for quite some time before investing any further, lol.
I want 35mm, 70-300mm and a macro lens, lol. I think I won't be stopping with 70-300mm and may want to go farther with the zoom, hahaha.....
Now, am realizing, why this is considered a costliest hobby

Click to expand...

$12000 + and that's not counting the computers and processing programs

I'll go along with Marcel on this one, too, but if you're on a tight budget, get the 35 for portraits only, or the 50mm 1.8 AF-S lens for all around general photography. Personally, I'd get the 50. Tack sharp photos.

^ What he said.

The 50/1.8 is a great little prime for the money, and too cheap not to own!

I have the 35mm 1.8G prime and although its quite cheap, its really solid and well made...and beautiful little lens and great performance, especially towards sunset or for interior shots requiring a flash.

While I'm still a noob, I've had my 50mm for about a month now. I've been thoroughly pleased with the lens. Photos come out incredibly sharp. I find it to be an exceptionally fast lens too.

I originally got mine for portrait photography and have found myself using it for various shoots. Don't know your budget, but I purchased mine off of CraigsList. Got a smoking deal on it! Worth looking into it as a possible option. I had been researching it on EBay too, just kept getting outbid and one too many buy it now offers for way too much.

Bottom, awesome lens!

35mm.... $209.00
Nikon 2183 - 35mm - Nikon Lenses - AF-S DX Nikkor f/1.8G Lens

cnyram said:

If I could get only one, between the 35 and 50, I'd get the 40mm Micro! Very sharp and you can experiment with macro at the same time!

Click to expand...

This really isn't a bad idea. With the 40mm, you get that focal length that you're seeking, along with sharpness and you can play with it's macro feature.

I just want to see a picture showing the actual image taken with 50mm and the corresponding cropped image. Likewise, for 35mm and 40mm too.

Thanks in advance and anticipation. Will opt one soon

From my Galaxy S2 (Tapatalk 2)

Kamesh said:

I just want to see a picture showing the actual image taken with 50mm and the corresponding cropped image. Likewise, for 35mm and 40mm too.

Thanks in advance and anticipation. Will opt one soon

From my Galaxy S2 (Tapatalk 2)

Click to expand...

You might want to check on Nikon's website. I remember they had a little page about lens selection where you could see the same photo taken with a whole bunch of different lenses. Maybe check "lens selector" on their website.

Given the crop factor, I am going to get 35mm for portraits, since 50mm is equivalent to 70mm.

Some one started the thread and am going to get.

From my Galaxy S2 (Tapatalk 2)