Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 vs 50mm f/1.4????

[adamfell]

Hello. I'm having trouble deciding what lense to buy and after reading numerous reviews and forum comments, I'm still none the wiser! I am currently using a Nikon D80 body with the Nikkor 18-135mm kit lens. I am after a prime or near prime lense for the low light capabilities and of course nice bokeh! It is mainly for travel, street, and landscape shots, seldom portraits. I can't decide which focal length is better. I realise 35mm is more versatile and can always crop if close-ups are required, but will the 50mm have less distortion to make it a more attractive option? Certainly the 35mm has a distinct price advantage, which I am not concerned about, but maybe its a little too cheap and nasty? Any help and advice greatly appreciated. Cheers.

[candleman]

to 50 will give bter bokeh as its a longer focal length



i do want a 35 tho' i love that focal length,

to be honest, i doubt anyone but a pixel peeper could detect the difference between a 50 f/1.4 and a 35m f/1.8

if you can afford the 50 f/1.4 "D" i'd go for it, as its a very well constructed lens. better quality than the 50 f/1.8 in terms of build. image quality.. again.. i doubt anyone but a pixel peeper would see much difference.

most people have trouble composing an image, let along worrying about pixel quality thereafter.

[jdconner]

i have the 50 1.4 and that rarely leaves my camera... it's built well, has almost no distortion that i can tell and has great bokeh... i have the D lens because i didn't want to pay the extra 200 or so for the G version which i think does have a little more distortion than the D... as far as landscapes, it may have a little too long of a focal length with the crop factor... it's equivalent to approx 75mm if i'm not mistaken.... i've kept my lenses for a while because i don't have a lot of money to spend (i'm just a lowly RN) and i haven't gotten any new lenses since the ones i've owned when i had my f5... and if you ever upgrade to a fullframe, the 50 1.4 will be a great lens to own... hope this has helped and that i didn't ramble on... good luck!!!

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by adamfell

I am after a prime or near prime lense for the low light capabilities and of course nice bokeh! It is mainly for travel, street, and landscape shots, seldom portraits. I can't decide which focal length is better.

If you want a nice bokeh then you need a lens with more diaphragm blades (e.g., 50 f/1.4). For street photography, you can consider 35 or 50mm FF (23-33 DX) f/1.2-f/2.

[adamfell]

Thanyou all for your thoughts. I think I am leaning towards the 35mm 1.8G. I had a look at some pics on Flickr that were taken with that lense, and I was quite impressed given the low price of the lense. Nice smooth bokeh too! I only has 7 blades but I think they are rounded/curved. The thing thats giving me the woops is that here in the UK they're charging around £213, yet in the States the MSP is only $199, but sold out almost everywhere! Darn rip-off UK prices!!

[vandergus]

There is much more to bokeh than just the number of aperture blades. The number/shape of the blades help to determine the shape of the out of focus highlights, but there are other qualities that are important too. Are the highlights ring-like or do they blend smoothly together. Do some objects get the double-vision effect or do they just fade away. These qualities are effected primarily by the optical design of the lens.

But, yes, the 35mm has perfectly unobjectionable though not super-creamy bokeh. You won't be dissapointed.

[Mycah]

I love the 35mm. It's the centerpiece of my setup, but they're both great glass. It comes down to what focal length you want.

[meandering]

> I think I am leaning towards the 35mm 1.8G

I think you should ;-)

> mainly for travel, street, and landscape shots

In my opinion, the the 50 is too narrow for that.

The 35/1.8 on a D80:

handheld: ipernity: Tag 20091001

with a gorillapod: Panoramio - Photos by meandering > 20091001

Some of the pictures cropped a bit, but otherwise sooc.

[For the love of light]

I don't know about Canon but with Nikon there is a catch to it. The 50mm prime (both 1.8 and 1.4) are FX format lenses so when used with an APS-C (Nikon D 300 S and lower) you get a cropped view of 75 mm. So not so much for landscapes but yeah, quite solid for portraits.

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by For the love of light

I don't know about Canon but with Nikon there is a catch to it. The 50mm prime (both 1.8 and 1.4) are FX format lenses so when used with an APS-C (Nikon D 300 S and lower) you get a cropped view of 75 mm. So not so much for landscapes but yeah, quite solid for portraits.

DX or FX lenses on a DX body will have the same field of view.
So a DX 80mm lens and an FX 80mm lens will both have a crop factor on a DX body.
So your statement is true that the 50 will have a fov like 75mm...but that is a function of the body not the lens. If they made a DX 50 it would also have a fov like 75mm