User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: unsure of which prime lens to get. please advise me.

  1. #1
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    unsure of which prime lens to get. please advise me.

    Hello all, i am now looking at getting either a 50mm or 38mm lens for me Nikon D90.

    Can someone adivise me on which lens to look at?
    I want something fast but also am on a budget. (i know fast doesnt = budget) but need a happy medium.

    I like tamron as i have two thus far but would look at others for sure.

    Thanks for you help.

    Jason

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Not enough info really

    a) why do you want primes ?
    b) to shoot what ?
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  3. #3
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    PLease forgive my ignorance but i was under the understanding that a prime lens is a fixed lens, have i got the term wrong?

    I want this lens to compliment what i have thus far being a 18-200 tamron and 90mm tamron.

    I want something mainly for portraite images in lower light? indoors wihtout having to use flash? will i achieve this with a 50 or 38mm with a high f stop?

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yeah, a prime lens (fixed focal length) is different than a fixed apperture lens (which could be a zoom also)

    50 1.8 is cheap and good
    35 1.8 is cheapish and good and faster to focus and track subjects than a 50 1.8
    50 1.4 af-s is faster again

    So, no bad choice here.

    I think on a D90 Id go a 35 1.8 as you have the crop factor.

  5. #5
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Kiwi
    The camera is also used by my wife and she is frustrated with the other lens not perfmorming in lower light.
    The Zoom lens is 3.8
    the macro is 2.8
    is 1.8 comparied to 2.8 going to be noticibly faster?
    or would i be better going with the 1.4?

  6. #6
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Looking about i am considering now the AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G

    any thoughts?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,831
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    that's the one I was talking about, there is no 38mm that I am aware of

    I think that's a cracker of a good lens the 35

    Re diffrence between 1.8 and 2.8, yes, it's a great deal faster

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

  8. #8
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    08 Nov 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SoonRah View Post
    Hello all, i am now looking at getting either a 50mm or 38mm lens for me Nikon D90.

    Can someone adivise me on which lens to look at?
    Apples and oranges. It depends what you want.

    A 50mm lens on a D90 will provide framing similar to 75mm on a film SLR.

    A 35mm lens on a D90 will provide framing similar to a 50mm lens on a film SLR.

    It all depends on what field of view you want.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Dec 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,051
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mate by the tone of your question (and the subsequent honest mistake with the aperture values), it sounds to me like you pretty new to all of this. If Im mistaken I apologise.

    1.8 is faster than 2.8, therefore letting in more light through the lens, therefore allowing better low light performance and making it easier to achieve handheld shutter speeds without compromising ISO. 1.4 is faster again than 1.8, making all that just that little bit easier again, but at a price.

    35mm on a crop sensor like your D90 is a handy lens. Dunno if you can get a 1.4 though ?? The Nikon guys will be able to advise you on that .... if not, the 35 1.8 will be great for you for now.
    Hi Im Darren

    www.darrengrayphotography.com

    SONY A850 (FF)] + GRIP | SONY A350 (APS-C) + GRIP | SONY NEX-5 +16 2.8 + 18-55 E-MOUNT LENSES | CZ 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-75 2.8 | 70-200 2.8 | 2 x 42AMs | 24" imac | LR | CS4 | + loads of other junk


  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess it's really depend on what do you want, it's fine if you want to have a low light performer f/1.8 should be "ok" on most application, but no matter how big your aperture will be, there's always limitation how dark is should perform well.

    maybe I'm wrong, but I believe that:
    1.4 is tad bigger than 1.8, the difference is really big. However 1.4 is expensive, 1.2 is also expensive and for nikon it's a non-AI version if I'm not mistaken so it won't meter on your D90.

    if you get 35mm/1.8 you can do handheld shoot with slower shutter speed than 50/1.8 without getting much blur, thought this is not really always true.
    Yashica Lynx 14E |Yashica Lynx 5000E | Yashica D | Nikon D60 | Nikon FG

    http://jankrix.redbubble.com
    http://cpm-project.tumblr.com

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2008
    Location
    River Murray
    Posts
    727
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    SoonRah, it depends on how you see the world. Some see it wide (tend to love shooting with wide angle lenses), some see it long (longer focal lengths). No one here can really tell you what lens to get, because only you know what you really want to photograph it, and how you want to compose it. Most scenes can be framed very similarly....ie a 50mm will frame a scene very close to a 35mm taken say 4 metres closer, but it depends on how you want that scene rendered as to what lens you use. Borrow/hire the prime lens/es from a shop or friend, and shoot with them for a weekend. You may then have a better idea of what you want.

  12. #12
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 May 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches - Sydney
    Posts
    774
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For portraits I would go for the 50mm 1.8, (I have one), it is a good focal length for portraits, and is good value for money. It will work very well on your D90. If you really have to get close, then a 35mm is better, but if you can step back slightly, I like the 50.
    David

    Nikon D810
    Nikkor AF-S 24-120VR, Nikkor AF-S 16-35VR, Nikkor AF-S 70-300VR, Nikkor AF 50 f1.8
    Tamron 90mm Macro

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches, Sydney
    Posts
    2,338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As you have an 18-200, why not, using some gaffers tape, set it at 35mm for a day and go out and shoot, and then next time, tape it down to 50mm. That should give you a feel for which focal length you like best.

    For the record, and although it might not suit your purposes, I have the 35mm 1.8 and it's a cracking little lens - fast autofocus, light, sharp and a nice bokeh.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Dec 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,051
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by maccaroneski View Post
    As you have an 18-200, why not, using some gaffers tape, set it at 35mm for a day and go out and shoot, and then next time, tape it down to 50mm. That should give you a feel for which focal length you like best.

    .
    Thats a good idea Tony ... but of course, the DOF thing. In terms of FOV and perspective alone though, thats a great idea. Love gaffa tape, build a house with that stuff

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by davidd View Post
    It will work very well on your D90. If you really have to get close, then a 35mm is better, but if you can step back slightly, I like the 50.
    umm...you mean to get it wide? and step up to the front to get closer?

  16. #16
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    27 May 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches - Sydney
    Posts
    774
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 35 will be better if you don't have much room(indoors), so you have to get closer, but I prefer the 50 for portraits if you have enough room to get back a bit. I would like an 85 even more, but you need even more room.

    As Tony says above, the best idea is to see which length you prefer first, by using your existing lens.
    Last edited by davidd; 28-07-2010 at 11:21am.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Dec 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,051
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    davidd is right. You need much more space to work effectively with a 50 than a 35. Particularly on an APS-C sensor with a magnification of x1.5

    It all depends on where the OP will be taking the majority of the photos.

    50s and 85s (I have both) are great outdoors and when you have more room to move. I shoot loads of portraits at 200 when i have the room. Kiwi shoots them at 400 from the next suburb

  18. #18
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Cheers for all the adivice, has helped heaps.
    I am only fiarly new to all the tech side of this yes.

  19. #19
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 Mar 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think i will go for the 35mm i mentioned. I guess the main result i am wanting from this lens if better images in lower light, and seeing how cost is an issue then i am leaning toward the 35mm. Something quicker would be nice but from what you have all said i wiil be happy with the 35mm.

    Cheers again

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches, Sydney
    Posts
    2,338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SoonRah View Post
    I think i will go for the 35mm i mentioned. I guess the main result i am wanting from this lens if better images in lower light, and seeing how cost is an issue then i am leaning toward the 35mm. Something quicker would be nice but from what you have all said i wiil be happy with the 35mm.

    Cheers again
    Although the 50mm 1.8 is cheaper than the 35...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •