Nikon 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.4

Simo70

I need some advise on a lens I would like to get but still undecided because I am not sure if it would be redundant with the lenses I already own.
As of now I have the nikon 12-24 f4 the 50mm f1.4, the 80-200 f2.8 and the 300mm f4. Basically I don't have a middle range zoom to use mostly when I go on a day trip with the family and don't need to bring the entire backpack. When I was using my film camera I really liked the 50mm 1.4 but now with my DSLR Nikon D300s it is not a "normal" prime anymore but a 75mm equivalent.
Basically, I was thinking to get the 35mm 1.8 (about 52.5mm on the D300s) that I can use between the 24mm and the 50mm (or the 80mm) that could be suitable for general purpose including landscape, portrait and family (group) photo either outdoor or indoor.
Reading from some reviews it seems to be a very good lens and also pretty fast, but I am afraid that it would be too close to the 50mm I already own.
Has anyone ever used it?? Is it good?? Would you buy it if you already own the 50mm f1.4??

Any suggestions are highly appreciated.

Thank you,
Simone.

angevin1

Simo70 wrote: »

I need some advise on a lens I would like to get but still undecided because I am not sure if it would be redundant with the lenses I already own.
As of now I have the nikon 12-24 f4 the 50mm f1.4, the 80-200 f2.8 and the 300mm f4. Basically I don't have a middle range zoom to use mostly when I go on a day trip with the family and don't need to bring the entire backpack. When I was using my film camera I really liked the 50mm 1.4 but now with my DSLR Nikon D300s it is not a "normal" prime anymore but a 75mm equivalent.
Basically, I was thinking to get the 35mm 1.8 (about 52.5mm on the D300s) that I can use between the 24mm and the 50mm (or the 80mm) that could be suitable for general purpose including landscape, portrait and family (group) photo either outdoor or indoor.
Reading from some reviews it seems to be a very good lens and also pretty fast, but I am afraid that it would be too close to the 50mm I already own.
Has anyone ever used it?? Is it good?? Would you buy it if you already own the 50mm f1.4??

Any suggestions are highly appreciated.

Thank you,
Simone.

In your post you mention a mid-range zoom, and then also about the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens.

For mid-range zooms of course, the venerable 24-70mm f/2.8 cannot be beat.
But for a Dx camera, that can get a bit long in tooth. Many folks seem to like the Tamaron 17-50mm f/2.8. I think my copy was not as sharp as has been reported. I now have a Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8 and am quite happy with it. On the D90 when wanting to shift this lenses capability upwards in the range, I add a KENKO teleplus pro300 1.4x TC. The addition of the TC has helped me extend my current lens line up nicely, allowing me to change things around to suit.

I have been tempted to get the DX 35mm lens a time or two, but keep going back to SLR Gears DXO testing and find it wanting. But for $200, how can anyone complain.

angevin1

Seymore wrote: »

, is one of Nikons sleeper lenses (IMPO) and is quite cost effective (~$150 +/-$50 used).

yep! x2

cmadness

I don't think you'll regret getting the 35mm 1.8. I love mine. We recently went to the Vancouver aquarium and the 35mm was the only lens I used inside. I left it on F1.8 the whole day because it was so dark inside and it did great even on my d40. Here's a link: http://s99.photobucket.com/albums/l299/cmadness1/SeattleVancouver/
I picked up mine used on ebay with a filter for $150. It's very sharp and light.

Simo70

Sorry I wasn't clear. Yes I was thinking about a walk-around lens and I thought to get the 35mm to pair it with the 50mm I already own. I kind of like prime lenses although they have the cons of switch between them all the time you need more reach ore vice versa. My budget is around $200 therefore I thought about the 35mm which seems sharp and with a good color rendition based on reviews and cmadness photos.
Saymore the lens you are mentioning looks pretty good and based on the reviews seems to be much better than the actual 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 VR., also has a metal mount and not plastic. I will check few prices on ebay.
All the others lenses that were mentioned are pretty expensive and heavy. I actually have an old Sigma 28-70mm 2.8 but because it is heavy and also because it is not as sharp as would like it to be I barely use it.

Simo70

Seymore wrote: »

Simone... I'm also a bit unclear on your needs. I have to ask, like Tom... you mention mid-range zoom and ask about primes. What are you needing this lens for? A walk-around lens?

Since you have 12-24 and 50, but have a wider gap between 50 and 80, I'd suggest you may want to consider the Nikon kit lens (18-70/3.5-4.5) as a walk-around lens. I doesn't weight a ton (like the 24-70/2.8), covers alot of territory, is one of Nikons sleeper lenses (IMPO) and is quite cost effective (~$150 +/-$50 used).

Let us know if this helps and what you decide...

What do you mean with Nikon sleeper lens IMPO??

InsuredDisaster

I've got the 35mm f2D. I found when I do'nt want to deal with the weight of zooms, the 35 is very nice. However, for me, I like a 35mm on full frame. I'm not a big fan of the ~50mm ish range for a walk around. Not wide enough. But I did once spend a few days on a trip shooting nothing but the 35mm on my D300. Its kinda liberating to have the bare minimum.

Simo70

InsuredDisaster wrote: »

I've got the 35mm f2D. I found when I do'nt want to deal with the weight of zooms, the 35 is very nice. However, for me, I like a 35mm on full frame. I'm not a big fan of the ~50mm ish range for a walk around. Not wide enough. But I did once spend a few days on a trip shooting nothing but the 35mm on my D300. Its kinda liberating to have the bare minimum.

That's my point too. With my Nikon F90 (S90 in USA) and F4 I used the 50mm 1.4 a lot and I really enjoyed it.
Now as you metioned the 50mm is really a 75mm but the 35mm becames again the normal 50mm of the full frame.
35mm on a full frame is cool too. Now that you made me think I have a Nikon 20mm 2.8 which would be a nice 30mm on a DX camera. I could bring both the 20mm and 50mm as a walk-around.

InsuredDisaster

Simo70 wrote: »

That's my point too. With my Nikon F90 (S90 in USA) and F4 I used the 50mm 1.4 a lot and I really enjoyed it.
Now as you metioned the 50mm is really a 75mm but the 35mm becames again the normal 50mm of the full frame.
35mm on a full frame is cool too. Now that you made me think I have a Nikon 20mm 2.8 which would be a nice 30mm on a DX camera. I could bring both the 20mm and 50mm as a walk-around.

Funny thing, I was thinking about suggesting a 20mm 2.8 to you, since I was definately thinking about getting one (so I got a D700 instead) to use my my D300. 35mm wasn't quite wide enough for my tastes on the DX format.

But since you seemed to be looking at 1.4-1.8's I figured you wouldn't be interested in the 2.8. I think the 20mm would be a great lense to carry around though.

Simo70

It took me a while to take the final decision and find the good deal, but I finally got the Nikon 18-70mm.
Still waiting for it but will post my impressions as soon as get it and use it.
Thank you all for your help. Will keep you posted.

Bruce I

I have the 35 1/8 mm and I love it for indoor shoots of the kids ... the D90 loves it ... I also have the 50 1.8 that I like to put on for outdoor ...but there has been a lot of talk about he 18-105mm that almost seem to have great range ...but not a fast lens as the two forward lenes mentioned ...guess it all depends what your shooting ...35 ..grandkids indoors ...parties ..stuff like that ..anything indoors ...50mm if in a hall ...but mostly outdoors ... then I just have the kit ...17-55mm which I use mostly outdoors for wider stuff ... all depends on your needs like I said !

Simo70

Got it!! The lens seems to be well kept from the previous owner. Haven't had the time to test it yet, beside few shots indoor and outdoor. So far it seems nice. It looks a little bit soft but it is sharp and the AF seems pretty fast on my D300s. The only concern I have regards the front group. It slightly moves if you shake the lens, at all focal lengths from 18 to 70. Not sure if it is normal (thoughts??), all my other zooms zoom internally, although it seems it doesn't effect the image.
Will write more after I use it for a while.

Brian_S

Simo70 wrote: »

Got it!! The lens seems to be well kept from the previous owner. Haven't had the time to test it yet, beside few shots indoor and outdoor. So far it seems nice. It looks a little bit soft but it is sharp and the AF seems pretty fast on my D300s. The only concern I have regards the front group. It slightly moves if you shake the lens, at all focal lengths from 18 to 70. Not sure if it is normal (thoughts??), all my other zooms zoom internally, although it seems it doesn't effect the image.
Will write more after I use it for a while.

I have the same lense, mine also has a bit of movement to it making it seem like something is loose but i've had it for 6 years now and it hasn't caused any problems at all

Simo70

Brian_S wrote: »

I have the same lense, mine also has a bit of movement to it making it seem like something is loose but i've had it for 6 years now and it hasn't caused any problems at all

Thanks Brian, that's all I needed to hear. Look forward to use it more...tomorrow, walking to a snowy downtown Boston would be a perfect day to start!!!