DSLRUsers.com

Its amazing how popular the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 lenses are in this forum. While pondering whether to indulge in such a small and light lens, I was wondering what members think about the 35mm F2 lens that seems to look pretty similar.

The 35mm on a Digi SLR would give you the kind of image that a 50mm would have given you on a film SLR give or take a few mms. Is the popularity of the 50mm due to its image being around 75mm on the old scale.

So the question is, if you were going to have an all rounder fixed focal lenght lens on your digital camera, would you go for a 35mm or a 50mm?

I am a happy user of the 50mm lens but that being said,

there are times when I am close to the action or restricted in walking back far enough to get the composition just right with the 50mm,

I say get both and you will never regret it.

But if i was restricted to one, i would take the 50mm because it will givbe you that 1 - 2 steps more in low light....

That being said if you dont do much low light................

I have just bought the 50mm from Birdy and I'm very happy with it. I would say that it is more of a portrait lense than a walk around lense as 75mm is a bit much for capturing a street scene.

But for the price the 50mm lens is the best value in town at $180. I believe that the 35mm is closer to $400.

If they were both the same price then I'd probably go the 35mm as I reckon it might be a bit more versatile.

The 50mm does give you an extra couple of stops but if you are taking many pics at f1.8 then you had better make sure you get your focusing right. You can get an infocus nose and an out of focus eye!

Ahh, Peter I'm in the same dilemma. I'm swaying towards the 35mm. Like you said, the 35mm translates to approx 50mm on the D70 which would be more versatile. One factor which or which may not concern you is that the 50mm is made in China while the 35mm is still made in Japan.

I've seen the 35mm sell for AU$429 @ Discount Digital Photographics in Sydney - maybe Birdy can get it cheaper ...

Cheers, Sam

Peter

The big strength of the 50 is for portrait shots in low light. For me the 50/1.4 in particular gives the low light edge I just wouldn't get with the 35, but if low light wasn't a big issue you'd obviously fit more in the frame with the 35.

Comes down to your intended use.

Thank you for those responses. For a while I thought there was no one out there but I realised it was a Sat morning and some of you most probably have a life other than this website.

I suspect that with DX and all Nikon will bring out a newer range of these sought after fixed focal lengthers. The 50mm 1.4 with its great hunk of front glass certainly looks the business.

As I travel OS a bit for work I am always conscious of weight. I think a 35 or 50 could be the go and maybe a 2x.

On another note, I have bought a few lenses now from Discount Photographics. Certainly quick and prices are slightly above Birdies. They have quite a few in stock most times. The outlet is a small apartment in North Sydney.

Peter Mc

stubbsy wrote:Peter

The big strength of the 50 is for portrait shots in low light. For me the 50/1.4 in particular gives the low light edge I just wouldn't get with the 35, but if low light wasn't a big issue you'd obviously fit more in the frame with the 35.

Comes down to your intended use.

BUT, you can get away with a slower shutter with 35mm than 50mm

Peter,
I have all 3 lenses you are considering and would suggest you get both.

The 50mm 1.8 is easily the best value Nikkor lens, for under $200 you get a fast high quality Nikon lens.

The 50mm 1.4 is a great portrait or low light lens and this focal length corresponds to a good portrait length on digital.

The 35mm 2.0 is an excellent walkaround lens having a much wider field of view than the above lenses, but still very good in low light.

I summary I would get the 50mm for taking low lights hots of people, like a party or band, or for portraits and the 35mm for landscapes or a wider field of view. Get both. As a reference point, before zooms where of the quality they are today, a standard kit may have been viewed as a 28 or 35mm for wide, a 50mm for std with a 85mm for short telephoto. Don't be embarressed to have two primes!

There's nothing wrong with having two primes I'm awaiting the second prime and it should arrive tomorrow

I predominantly use the 50mm 1.8 nowadays over teh kit lens as I feel the image quality is much better. Due to the fact that it lacks a wide angle ability, i opted to get the 20mm 2.8 as well

PiroStitch wrote:There's nothing wrong with having two primes I'm awaiting the second prime and it should arrive tomorrow

I predominantly use the 50mm 1.8 nowadays over teh kit lens as I feel the image quality is much better. Due to the fact that it lacks a wide angle ability, i opted to get the 20mm 2.8 as well

Confirmed, it was picked up by CP.

Piro, you should find the 20mm very handy

Peter, here are a few snapshots with a 35mm
http://www.d70users.com/viewtopic.php?t ... light=35mm

Glen,

I actually have a manual 20mm 3.5 and have not yet used it on the D70. Maybe I will also ge it out of mothballs and give it a whirl on manual. Those things hardly need focusing anyway. What are your thoughts on such an antiquated piece of glass as a standard part of the kit? I suspect it would give the 12-24 a bit of a run for its money in clarity even though it lacks AF. PS I've got 85 mm covered three times now with 24-120, 70-200 and 85 1.8. I've got the wider angles covered with a Nik12-24 and think the idea of a lighter 50mm is becoming more appealing the more I read. I've got 50mm covered with the kit lens and the 24-120 but I think the clarity of a 50mm would kick their butts.


Peter Mc

Peter, you are dead right about 20mm barely needing focussing. A great addition to your kit, very easy to use on manual due to the lcd and histogram. Always nice to recycle, would imagine it would be as sharp as anything that width

Here is an aditional question

35 or 20?

if I was to buy one today which should I go for

I already have the 50mm 1.8

I'm officially inspired. Its (20mm) coming out of the closet and going with me to QLD on Wednesday. I will also do a few comparisons between it and the 12-24 which is a biggish thing.  PS I took some shots of my kids recently with my old Nik105manual. Results were absolutely suburb. Printed them up on the EpR1800 and get many favourable comments on these....mind you I have to fish for a few of them but they come eventually...nothing wrong with fishing.

Sorry about all the emoticons but I am a visual thinker.

Peter Mc

Olrac

I would go for the 20 if you have the 50 as it gives you a completely different kind of photo experience. Following this thread I would suggest you then save up and buy the 35 which gives you just one supurb line up. Of course if there was a reasonable 12-14 I would go for that as well.

20 just isnt 20 any more on digital. 20 on film is superbly wide and can be a fantastic tool for some very imaginative and thought provoking photos. Remember your 20 is now officially 30 in the digi scale.

Peter Mc

olrac wrote:Here is an aditional question

35 or 20?

if I was to buy one today which should I go for

I already have the 50mm 1.8

Carlo, what do you want to shoot with the 20 or 35mm?

I am trying not to buy any dx lenses unless an equivilent isnt avalible in a "Normal" (for lack of a better word) lens...

My reasoning is that eventually Nikon will bring out a full frame sensor in a camera and I am not a fan of having to rebuy lenses.

Because when I get my full frame sensor camera that is 30MP all for under $500 with a 70 - 500 f2 vr thrown in these primes will be very nice range indeed..

Back to reality:

The 20 first then the 35

Seems reasonable to me...

EDIT: I want a walk around lens the 50 is just a little too tele on a digital.

Here's the real line up if you wish to build your collection and they can be used in the near future if FF is introduced.

All AF-D

14/2.8 WA not FE
20/ 2.8
24/ 2.8
28/1.4
35/2.0
45/2.8
50/1.4

MF/ AI-S

55/1.2
58/1.2 Noct

then

60/2.8 Micro
85/1.4
105/ 2 or 135/2
or 105/2.8 Micro
180/2.8
200/4 Micro
300/4 AF-S II

If you still can find MF, grab them and you'll have lot of fun! These are the most sought lens collection which I always dream and i have 95% of them in the above range of prime.

Birdy

Which is the other 5%?

Peter Mc

... Obsolete ...

petermmc wrote:Birdy

Which is the other 5%?

Peter Mc

5% which I don't have on that list are the 135/2 DC + 60/2.8 micro (I have Tamron 90) + 105 micro (I have Tamron 180)

But also have other 10 MF AI-S lenses as the 20 up to 180.

Do you ever use the manuals on your digi SLR's?

Peter Mc

Birddog114 wrote:But also have other 10 MF AI-S lenses as the 20 up to 180.

petermmc wrote:Do you ever use the manuals on your digi SLR's?

Peter Mc

Birddog114 wrote:But also have other 10 MF AI-S lenses as the 20 up to 180.

Yes, mostly the 58/1.2 Noct and 55/1.2 on the D2x, the D2x recognizes the MF lens after input in the menu, also I shot with other MF AI-S lens as well but not much in comparison with the 58/1.2 Noct.

Has anyone tried the new 10-20mm sigma lense for DSLR?? heard its a very tidy little lens.. waiting for a report from Dug once he gets back from PNG after 3 weeks of taking fotos

Tim

Birdy,

I noticed a 45mm 2.8 on your list. How, when, where, why, who, whose, whom, which or that???? Mainly Why? Why did they do this one?

Peter Mc

petermmc wrote:Birdy,

I noticed a 45mm 2.8 on your list. How, when, where, why, who, whose, whom, which or that???? Mainly Why? Why did they do this one?

Peter Mc

It's the 45P or another name called pancake, It's manual lens and now discontinued from Nikon last month, it's the most forgotten lens among many pp, it's produced photo with very nice or the best bokeh than 35/2 or 50/1.4, very thin, compact, now it's most sought lens in black version, it also comes with silver but not interested by many pp.

Evaluations By Bjørn Rørslett

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Great response. Trust you to know that.

Peter, these two shots let you see the size of the 45P, barely bigger than an end cap and beautifully made.

Wow!

I had an older 50mm that I traded recently that looked very similar but it was not as shallow as that. You wouldn't even notice it in the kit bag.

Peter Mc