35mm or 50mm

[SSE]

As my photography is growing so is the interest from prospective clients. Although I find I enjoy street and sports photography, I'm being asked to now attend weddings and take family shots. (Don't panic, I have clearly advised these people I am not a pro wedding photographer, and if they want one, they need to speak with one)

This means I'm now looking for a lens that will allow me to take great indoor shots without a flash and allow great outdoor portrait shots.

I own a Nikon D5000 and have been looking at various 50mm and 35mm lenses. I understand with the DX format of the D5000 the equivalent 50mm = 75mm and the 35mm = 52mm.

Obviously cost is a factor as it is with most people, but if it's going to be a good investment any suggestions will be considered.

My other lenses are the 18-55 kit lens, a 70-300 Tamron and a 18-105mm, all with a minimum f3.5.

[inkista]

I'd say look at the portrait shots you've already taken, and see what focal length you were using when you shot most of them. ExposurePlot or PhotoStats could help you with that.

Everybody's a little different in terms of what working distances and framing they prefer, and the size of the venue will also have an effect. So there's a lot of "it depends" at work.

[Sweetlifephoto]

I think most people will tell you that longer focal lengths 85 and higher are more flattering for portrait work. Unless you are restricted by space or are shooting large groups of people, I would go longer for a portrait lens.

[Footski]

I bought the Nikon 50mm f1.8D lens for portraiture. As it approximates to a 75mm in 35mm terms, I find it an ideal portrait lens and at the price is, for most of us, a better buy than the more expensive APS version.

I love this lens and use it a lot.

[SSE]

Thanks for all your answers.

The 50mm f1.8D was looking good for a while until I found out it doesn't AF on the D5000. As I'm also a buddy sports photographer as well, I'd need that facility..so the slightly more expensive version could be on the cards.

Still time to mull things over though!

[Peach]

I have the 50mm f/1.8 and I really do enjoy it aside from the lack of autofocus on my D40x body. I'm going through pretty much the same decision making as you: do I want to upgrade to the autofocus capable 50mm or add the 35mm (which is cheaper) to my bag and save up for the new 50?

If you do sports photography, the more expensive 50mm AF-S is probably the way to go.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Peach

If you do sports photography, the more expensive 50mm AF-S is probably the way to go.

For sports??? neither lens would leave the bag (unless I was photographing a ping pong tournament from the "sidelines")

The 50mm will be the better "portrait" lens, but it will not be the more versatile lens.

[SSE]

sk66, although I understand a 50mm lens is no alternative to a zoom for sport, I'm in a position where my current zooms do a pretty good job. I'm also in a position where I can get some indoor sporting shots, allowing for close proximity...therefore I hope the 50mm will lend itself on occasion. Thanks for the input anyway!

I'll be checking out both the 35mm and 50mm tomorrow