Which Nikon lens would you get?

Howe Creative Photography

A Nikon 35mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 too!

Makeroftoys

Howe Creative Photography wrote:

A Nikon 35mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 too!

Asking "what lens" is like asking "what motor vehicle". I like both 4x4 pickup trucks and italian sports cars, but obviously for different reasons.

you'll need to tell us what you want to accomplish before we can give meaningful opinions.

edit: looked at profile for body information.

cab.in.boston

Howe Creative Photography wrote:

A Nikon 35mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 too!

I have both, and I like both. I use the 50 when I need a little more reach. The 35 is very close to a "normal" lens on the DX sensor, and the 50 is a mild telephoto, useful for portraits, etc. I have also used it to shoot my daughter in her swimming lessons at the (poorly lit) indoor pool, where I needed the 1.8 but couldn't get quite close enough to use the 35.

It all depends on what focal length you prefer. Set the 24-70 to 35 and shoot without zooming for a while, then set it to 50 and try that length. Whichever you prefer, go for that lens, although I don't think having one means you can't or shouldn't have the other. They're both relatively cheap, so if it's in your budget, it wouldn't hurt to pick up the pair.

Art Scott

Howe Creative Photography wrote:

A Nikon 35mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 too!

In your case I can see no reason for either lens......you have both covered with the exceptional 24-70............the 2.8's are fast enuff if you bump up your iso a little......

Qarik

Howe Creative Photography wrote:

A Nikon 35mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 too!

neither. If you need a low light lens then go with a 50 or 85mm 1.4. There is not enough differentiation between 35 or 50 1.8 vs your 24-70mm imo.

Mitchell

Qarik wrote:

neither. If you need a low light lens then go with a 50 or 85mm 1.4. There is not enough differentiation between 35 or 50 1.8 vs your 24-70mm imo.

Agreed.

Your zoom is actually equal or superior to those primes at those focal lengths. The stop you get isn't really worth it. Enjoy your great, Nikkor zoom.

Save your pennies and get the 85mm, f1.4 which is a step up as a fast portrait prime from your zoom.

thegridrunner

Your zoom is actually equal or superior to those primes at those focal lengths. The stop you get isn't really worth it. Enjoy your great, Nikkor zoom.

In my case, I won't get the lens for the extra stop but rather for the shallow depth a field. The way the lens isolates your subject from their surroundings is wonderful. The bokeh of the lens is nice as well. Personally, I would go for the 85mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.4 in that order on a full frame camera. On a cropped sensor, I would go for the 50mm 1.4

Qarik

thegridrunner wrote:

Your zoom is actually equal or superior to those primes at those focal lengths. The stop you get isn't really worth it. Enjoy your great, Nikkor zoom.

In my case, I won't get the lens for the extra stop but rather for the shallow depth a field. The way the lens isolates your subject from their surroundings is wonderful. The bokeh of the lens is nice as well. Personally, I would go for the 85mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.4 in that order on a full frame camera. On a cropped sensor, I would go for the 50mm 1.4

If we are talking bokeh then 85mm 1.4 is legendary...the cream machine. The 50mm G 1.4 is quite lovely as well. This is becasue of the 9 blades in the aperture make it rounded and more pleasant vs the 50mm or 85mm 1.8. The 50mm 1.4D does not have the 9 blade aperture fyi.