35mm or 24mm on a DX body?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Anthony8858, Jul 15, 2008.

  1. I'll try to make some sense. :tongue:


    Coming from Canon, one of the most used lenses on the FF 5D is the 35L.

    So if I now have the D300, would you get the 35 f2, or something like the 24mm (36mm equal)?

    Would the 24mm yield the same perspective as one would get with the 35mm on a FF?
     
  2. cotdt

    cotdt

    Jul 14, 2007
    Bay Area, USA
    Yes. But most 24mm lenses are slow at f/2.8 and have some distortion or field curvature.
     
  3. Are you saying that you prefer the 35 f2 over the 24 f2.8 on a DX?
     
  4. ora-et-labora

    ora-et-labora

    304
    Mar 15, 2008
    Earth
    If 35mm is your favorite focal length on a 5D, you need a 24mm on a DX to get a similar FOV. That's easy. The hard thing: the Nikon AF lineup is not as good as the Canon's 35 L.

    My standard recommendation: Zeiss 25/2.8 - the best prime in this focal length for Nikon. It's a bit longer, so it works very fine as a "wide standard".
     
  5. cotdt

    cotdt

    Jul 14, 2007
    Bay Area, USA
    The 24/2.8 has strong field curvature and f/2.8 is rather slow for a prime lens. It's a wonderful close-up lens though. The 35/2 is quite good at f/2 and sharp corner to corner at f/2.8, but on DX it's too telephoto for my tastes. I would look to Sigma's 24/1.8, though I've yet to try it.
     
  6. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    i seconds Phil's suggestion for the sig 24 1.8 .....;-)
     
  7. All Nikon DX cameras, including your d300, have a crop factor of 1.5. So if you want to compute the equivalent DX FOV from a full frame reference, just divide by 1.5. In other words, to get the same FOV as a 35mm lens gave on your Canon 5d, you'd need a 35/1.5 = 23.3mm lens on your d300.

    It works the other way around, too. Just multiply by the crop factor. A 35mm lens on your d300 will give you a field of view equivalent to a 35x1.5 = 52.5mm lens did on your 5d.

    The 35/2 is a fast, versatile, and affordable lens. It's highly recommended for both FX and DX cameras.
     
  8. agile_one

    agile_one

    335
    May 20, 2008
    Sarasota, FL
    I made the same switch as the op from Canon 5D to D300, and also like the op, the 35 1.4L was one of my favorite and most used lenses on the 5D. I just loved it's sharpness, colors, and low light capabilities.

    Unfortunately, I have seen that there is absolutely no Nikon equivalent for the D300. I went and got a Nikkor 24 2.8 AF D a while ago, and it is perfectly acceptable, but doesn't approach the 35L for speed, sharpness, lack of distortion or colors. The 24 2.8 is not bad in any way, it's just that the 35L is one of those crazy special lenses, sort of like the Nikkor 85 1.4.

    I live in hope that Nikon will introduce some fast primes later this year ...

    Overall I am happy I made the swutch - I was Nikon shooter back in film days, and wanted something with faster fps and focusing than the 5D for sports and active grandkids. The D300 gives me those, and a lot more. It's just the lenses, mostly primes, that I miss a bit.
     
  9. After putting everything in "perspective", I've decided to complete my lineup of primes, and sell my D300 to get the D700.
    I love taking a single prime lens out for a day, and accept the challenges of a fixed focal length.

    I currently have the 35 f/2, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, and 180 f2.8, 70-300VR.
    I will sell my 18-200VR, 16-85VR, and get the 24-70 f2.8
     
  10. OH, BTW...can someone tell me how to make the title of my post in BOLD
     
  11. How about the Nikon 28 f1.4, they are very cheap and available!

    the latest rumors are :

    24mm 1.4 AF-S
    35mm 1.4 AF-S
    50mm 1.4 AF-S
    85mm 1.4 AF-S
     
  12. RichNY

    RichNY Guest

    If you can live with 2.8 you might also consider the 14-24 as it is superior optically to all of Nikon's primes in that focal range.
     
  13. bigwilly

    bigwilly

    143
    Oct 19, 2007
    Toronto
    Not quite the same, but what about the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.
     
  14. agile_one

    agile_one

    335
    May 20, 2008
    Sarasota, FL
    :biggrin:
    28 f/1.4? Right - got 3k to give me? Why did Nikon discontinue that wonderful lens? :eek:

    These rumoured lenses would be most welcome, and I will be all over the 24 1.4 the 1st day it is available.

    I hava a Siggy 30 1.4 on the way to me now, and I expect good things with it from the D300. The op has decided to move on to a D700, so his uwa options are much better now. :wink: He still needs that supposed incoming 35 1.4, though - hope it happens.
     
  15. 35 f1.4 on the D700 sounds real nice.:biggrin:

    I've had Nikon / Canon Crop cameras and also the Canon 5D, and never missed FF until I realized how much I missed everyday shooting with a 35mm lens FF.
    Even though I cover the FL with a zoom, there's something real nice about having a 35 prime.

    Just for fun, I'm gonna round off my lower end with either the 20 f/2.8 or 24 f2.8 nikon
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2008
  16. waltny

    waltny

    Mar 27, 2008
    Reno, NV
    This has been an interesting thread. Ive been kicking around some of the same thoughs in my head. Of course Im DX for the forseeable and have never had FF or Canon, but I really like primes and have my eyes on a 35/2(50 DX effective) and the 24/1.8(36 DX effective). So is there really that much distortion at 24 that wouldnt be there on a true 35 with FF?
     
  17.  
  18. waltny

    waltny

    Mar 27, 2008
    Reno, NV
     
  19. Their is a general consensus that the Nikon 12-24 at 24mm beats all the standalone Nikon lenses (20,24,28) and is a close second to the 14-24. I would consider the 12-24...and you not only get 35mm equivalent but also 18-35mm equivalent.