1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

35mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by gladjo, Aug 15, 2009.

  1. gladjo

    gladjo Guest

    Both good low light lenses. I shoot in clubs alot and can't always use flash. Before my gear got stolen I had a 50 1.8 and it served me well. I really liked it's use as a portrait lense also. I found that tight spaces were a negative for this lense since I always wanted to "back up" but would usually back into a wall.

    Now the 35mm 1.8. This lense will do better in tight spaces and the pics seem as sharp as the 50mm. Can this lense also serve as a portrait lense?

    Should I get both? :biggrin:
     
  2. bluaeon

    bluaeon

    263
    Dec 9, 2008
    CA
    if u can, get both... i feel the same disadvantage on the 50... cant really use them on any tight spaces... i got a 24 2.8 to resolve this for me... i havent tried 35 yet.
     
  3. Wileec

    Wileec Guest

    35mm is a DX lens, so if FX is in your future, that will be an issue. Most lean toward longer lenses for portrait work. It really depends on if you're shooting individuals or groups. If most of your shooting needs the shorter lens, as a function of working distance, then that's the option to go with. If not, then the 50mm f/1.8 may be the better option, or better yet, especially for portraits, the 50mm AF-S f/1.4G and that AF-S will probably help with your club shots, too. I have the 50mm f/1.8 and after shooting a lot with a 105mm AF-S f/2.8, I notice the slower focus time of the 50mm f/1.8. Things to consider.

    Cheers!
     
  4. I have both the 35 f1.8 DX and the 50 f1.4 D. I had the 50 first and was forever finding it too long, except for portraits.
    I couldn't wait for the 35 to come out and bought one of the first available in my city.
    It stays on my camera nearly all the time at home (I use zooms for travel). It is a great walk-around lens and I seldom feel too close.
    It's fast, sharp and I like the colours and contrast. Wide open CA is an issue though. I don't see that you have a Nikon body, but if you have a D300 it will correct the CA in jpeg so that may not be an issue for you.
    I highly recommend both lenses but it sounds like for clubs the 35 may be your best bet.
    Go to a store, try them both and see for yourself which you prefer in confined spaces.
     
  5. lexdiamonnyc

    lexdiamonnyc

    918
    Mar 23, 2009
    nj/nyc
    I'd get them both........it's possible to get both for under $300 is you go used...
     
  6. gladjo

    gladjo Guest

    Forgot to mention I have a D200. :biggrin:
     
  7. staceyrr

    staceyrr

    3
    Apr 1, 2009
    Marietta, GA
    Anybody tried the 35mm 1.8 dx with a set of Kenko extension tubes? I have the 50mm 1.8 and that works great. I figure the 35mm would give me a little more magnification.
     
  8. kichu

    kichu

    287
    Oct 25, 2008
    Europe
    for d200 and I think its better to buy 35 as a first lens which will give you FOV close to the standard full frame lens, which is 50mm

    start from there and see you would rather have something wider as your next lens (20/2.8 perhaps) or a bit more reach (50/85 would be the obvious candidates)

    hope this helps
     
  9. Ronald M

    Ronald M

    Nov 10, 2008
    Chicago
    35 1.8 have escalated from 199 to 300, & I saw an online price today of 339. Nikon must believe they underpriced it when it sold so well two months ago.

    I would get an FX 35 2.0 before I would pay 300 for a DX.

    Then I would get a 50 1.8
     
  10. lexdiamonnyc

    lexdiamonnyc

    918
    Mar 23, 2009
    nj/nyc
    I got a 35 1.8 for $199 at B&H just this week.....:smile:
     
  11. Flynn

    Flynn

    330
    Jun 28, 2009
    Livermore, CA
    I have the 50 1.4 and had the 35 1.8 for a week. Reason I got the 35mm is just as you stated, back to the wall when using the 50mm. If you are going to shot clubs, go with the 35mm. Both are wonderful lenses.
     
  12. The price is $199.95. Some people are charging mark-ups because it is popular.

    Earlier this week, both B&H Photo and Walmart.com had it in stock for $199.95. Bing Cashback users could apply 4% off at B&H.

    I bought mine at B&H last month when they had it in stock. Adorama also takes back orders for the lens and it supposedly takes a few to several weeks.
     
  13. Flynn

    Flynn

    330
    Jun 28, 2009
    Livermore, CA
    mine was over 4 weeks at Adorama, canceled it when I found it elsewhere.
     
  14. If you can, get both, and and then add the 85/1.8 and a 1.4x telextender and you can cover any club or stage in the business.
     
  15. bellasdad

    bellasdad

    224
    Apr 25, 2008
    Fairfax, VA
    BH and Adorama still have them priced at $199 (but currently out of stock).

    I have the 50/1.8. Excellent lens but I find it too tight for indoor (e.g. house party) use...i.e., I find myself running out of room to back up.
     
  16. gladjo

    gladjo Guest

    Thanks for your replies kids. I will get both. Probably get the 50mm first as they are cheaper and easier to come by. O.K. Whose got one for sale? :biggrin:
     
  17. FYI, brand-new one can be had at Beach Camera's store on eBay. $139.99 with free shipping. If you use the Bing Cashback on eBay that is currently 10%, it's $123.19. Brand-new lens, authorized USA dealer, 5-year warranty.

    (Though very little goes wrong with the 50/1.8 once it's a good sample!.)
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.