Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Nikon 35mm 1.8 G

ray1 13 546 1 England
28 Apr 2010 8:19PM
Has anyone got this lens and what are your thoughts. Also does anyone have this and are able to compare it the 50mm 1.8.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

justin c 14 4.9k 36 England
28 Apr 2010 9:01PM
I have one advertised in the Classified's section if your interested.
paperboy 8 208
28 Apr 2010 9:03PM
I have the 50 1.8D , and had an opportunity to mess with the 35mm AF-S G. At that time it was on a D80 and I found (to me) subtle differences. 50mm great all around, for handling, optics, focus colour rendering, and use in low light. The 35 seemed closer to eye field of view perception. It was perceived to be a tad quicker, and fitted into how I wanted to frame the shot a bit more naturally. If a D40,40x, or 3000 then the 35mm without question due to focusing. Either lens on its' own I found great, and would choose the 35mm as preferred only after having used it. Setting out to purchase one or the other the 35mm would be my choice.
Hope this helps....howard
User_Removed 8 4.6k 1 Scotland
28 Apr 2010 11:12PM
Don't lose sight of the fact that a 50mm lens is the "natural" focal length for a 35mm film camera or an FX sensor digital camera. By "natural" I mean that it gives a perspective similar to that of the human eye.

With a DX or crop sensor digital camera, the equivalent "natural" focal length is between 30mm and 35mm.

So the 35mm lens you mention will be an ideal "main" prime lens on a DX camera while, on the same camera, a 50mm lens will be a good portrait lens, giving a somewhat foreshortened perspective similar to a 75 - 80mm portrait lens on an FX/35mm camera. (That foreshortened perspective is favoured for portraits because it produces a flattering distortion of the human face, generally being "kind" to protruding noses and chins)
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
29 Apr 2010 6:09AM
50mm lenses are very sharp, generally, because they are one of the simplest lenses to build, nothing complicated. I had a 35mm f3.5 macro on an Olympus, and I loved it, one of my all time favs, but it was 70mm on the digital body.

I just started building a Pentax system, and I have grandchildren, so I'm getting a 50mm f1.4, so I won't have to use flash very much inside. I have a 50mm f2.0, but it doesn't cut it, I need the extra light.

Eric's comments above are very interesting.
dandeakin 10 209 3 England
29 Apr 2010 9:27AM
I've had both for awhile (35mm 1.8 DX & 50mm 1.8D).

The 35mm is sharper wide open, and has AFS which is useful. It's an exceptionally sharp lens infact. I also find 35mm on a DX/APC sensor a much more useful focal length than 50mm.

If I had to get rid of one it'd be the 50mm anyday.
ray1 13 546 1 England
29 Apr 2010 5:16PM
Thanks guys - I have also considered the 50mm 1.4, however, for the same money perhas the way to go is get the 35 and 50mm 1.8 and cover all bases apart from the 1.4 aspect.
paperboy 8 208
29 Apr 2010 8:35PM
A very good purchase.....enjoy.
StrayCat 14 19.1k 3 Canada
29 Apr 2010 9:23PM
I just won an auction for a Pentax M 50mm f1.4, mint, and I am very happy. It will be my grandchildren lens.Smile

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.