Should I sell my 50mm?

[BLBJBranch]

Hey all,
I just ordered the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX AF Nikkor Lens. I would have ordered it when I first bought my equipment, but it came out a month or so later. Go figure.

I also have the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR and the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5 - 5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Lenses (with D90).

I decided to order the 35mm because the 50mm didn't seem to be wide enough. I was in a museum and several times I wasn't able to back up far enough, so I was a little disappointed.

The main reason I bought the 50mm was for low light, non-flash conditions, such as museums.

Anyway, should I sell the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Standard Auto Focus Nikkor Lens, or would it be good to have it on hand? Not a question of money, but if I won't use it anymore, there's no reason to keep it.

Thanks for the opinions.

[doctorjames]

Never ever sell a prime unless you need the money, or you are selling one to me

Im a big fan of primes, I think I will always prefer the fact that they arnt very flexible, it makes you think more about composition and placement. I agree that in the museum setting you need to be flexible, and the 35mm would be better (as you say).

You may find however that the 50mm is ideal for portrait work where you get more of a telephoto look, without having to compromise on depth of field (narrow) or low light conditions.

Keep it clean, dry and dust free and it will be there when you need it

[kirbinster]

It does not meet your needs - sell it!

[sk66]

It makes no sense to collect unused gear...

It may be worth less now than what you paid, but it will be worthless in 10yrs.

I've personally never kept a 50mm prime.... I find them nearly useless.

[BLBJBranch]

I was thinking there may be a time in low light where I might need the extra "zoom" of the 50mm as compared to the 35mm, such as a play or recital or something, so I figured I'd keep it.

It's small enough and light enough to carry around anyway.

Anybody agree or disagree? Is this a reasonable thought?

Thanks.

[Samanax]

Originally Posted by BLBJBranch

I was thinking there may be a time in low light where I might need the extra "zoom" of the 50mm as compared to the 35mm, such as a play or recital or something, so I figured I'd keep it.

It's small enough and light enough to carry around anyway.

Anybody agree or disagree? Is this a reasonable thought?

Sounds reasonable to me.

[doctorjames]

Sounds very reasonable