Any one got both 85mm 1.8g and 50mm 1.8g ?

[Cream]

I have zooms that cover the range on both these lenses, I have the 85mm but was seriously thinking about adding the 50mm.

I shoot portrait and landscape and suppose could perhaps benefit from the 35mm DX but am concerned about not using it if I ever went Full Frame.

Would welcome people's input, and perhaps some images taken with both for comparison.

 

[snagglepuss31]

The 35/1.8 DX is quite useful on FX. Using either 5x4 or 1.2x crop yields images almost free of vignetting. Check out some samples later in this thread:

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=216842&highlight=35/1.8

 

[firemist2000]

see here

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=339224

 

[Cream]

Now thats a clever idea, using the DX lens on an FX body and then cropping.

With today's pixel count there is no reason not to crop.

 

[Blufox]

I have them both, but shoot full-frame. In my opinion, they are both excellent alternatives to the 1.4G, but I am not sure how they compare on DX.

 

[Palmguy]

Now thats a clever idea, using the DX lens on an FX body and then cropping.

With today's pixel count there is no reason not to crop.

The 35/1.8 is usable for a lot of things on FX even without cropping (in my opinion).

 

[CastIron]

While not G lenses, I've owned 85, 35, and two 50s. I feel the 35 better compliments the 85 if you are to have only two and not all three.

 

[KDKarlson]

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that with the cost of going FF, a $200 lens (that you will get most of your money out of when you sell) is a pretty minor expense.

 

[Cream]

True, and I'd probably still retain a DX Camera body