Reading mode: Light Dark

35mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.4

Go to last post
N

Nickigirl

Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Location
Ottawa, ON, CA
Which is better for available-light pictures, indoors, in churches, at night.... mostly people, singly or in small groups... (both are the same price)

Thanks!
--
Cheers,
Nicki
 
50mm f1.4's significantly faster so should be better for hand-held available light work due to faster possible shutter speed and therefore less shake.

But, 35mm will give you a wider angle of view and be very useful for indoor and group portrait stuff. If you'll use a tripod, the faster aperture of the 50mm won't make any difference.

I have the 50mm and love it but, given what you want to do, you might want something wider.

Personally, I'd decide based on focal length (what suits you and will work for what you want to acheive) and then pick the lens. No good having a fast 50mm lens if you can't get everything you need into the shot...

How about the Sigma 30mm f1.4?

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...
 
I don't know anything about the Sigma... I tend to stick with the Nikon brand... I'm a bit of a snob, I guess? LOL

Do you feel that one lens gives a different quality photo than the other, ie is one softer, better bokeh, better colour, or whatever? I think I can work with either focal length...

--
Cheers,
Nicki
 
plusfour said:
If you'll use a tripod, the
faster aperture of the 50mm won't make any difference.
Click to expand...
I disagree, she's taking photos of people. The tripod isn't going to do much at all.

My opinion is the 50 is too long, unless you have a lot of room to back up. If you want 3 people in a photo with 50mm, you have to stand back very far. Also 50 is too short for good headshots. So I suggest 35mm f2.
 
I have both these lenses and I find the 35mm much handier because it's wider than the 50mm, which I only use occasionally for portraits. The 50mm is really a 75mm with the DX sensor; the 35mm is a 52mm-- closer to "normal".
--
http://jmj575m.smugmug.com



All the Best,

JMJ
 
the reality is that you try and keep your shutter speed at or above your focal lenght. so that said --a 50mm @ 1.4 you would wamt it to be around 1/60 sec.--the same for the 35mm which is at F2 (let's say 1 stop slower) so it's given speed would then be 1/30th of a second--basically a wash--now a 12mm @ F4 would be 1/8 + or - but about the same--of course all changed with 1.5x factor.

I have the 30mm F1.4(have also had the 35 f2) but always amazed what I can take with 12-24 in dark places----Wish Nikon would get on the stick and redo a 16/18mm f2.0 prime or similiar--even a f2.8--ron s.
--
Keeping it sane in an insane world is an inconvenience at an inconvenient time!!
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron
 
I don't have any experience of the 35mm, but I love my 50mm 1.4 - really sharp, great colours and smooth bokeh. Tends to spend a lot of time on my camera...

To see loads of images from both lenses, have a look at PBases's galleries:

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/50_14d_af

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/35_2afd

These are just images in PBase's galleries sorted by the lens used so they will be a complete mix - some great, some not so great.

But it can give you a good idea of the real-world differences between the 2 and some pointers to overall characteristics.

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...
 
Although I don't have the f/1.4 version of the 50mm, I find the 35mm f/2 a much better fit for my purposes. My 50mm f/1.8 is just an awkward focal length for me. I shoot alot indoors and it is just a bit too close for my liking.

Not withstanding the speed difference between the 2, you really should use your exisiting lenses to see what focal length will work for you.
 
The 50mm lens get too much overhype on these forums, mainly because the f1.8 version is a chep way to egt sharp photos.

50mm on a full framme ccd is too narrow for general indoor use, when loaded on a cropped ccd it becomes more of a specialist lens. Slightly too short for a good portrait lens in my opinion but a good close up head and shoulders portriat lens.

In my opinion and many years of using a dslr is that something around 35/40 mm on full frame is best for the use you have described. This equates to 24mm on a cropped ccd. So even a 30mm may be too narrow for all cases.

Why not consider the Nikon 2.8 zoom in this range.

I personally use the 24mm but lots of people don;t like it although I do, and its not as fast as you want anyway.

--
Bluenose
 
I went from 50 (3 lenses) to 35 to 28! Including more background and surrounding is better for most people unless you need to have intense head shots. Not every one looks good (photogenically speaking) in a head shot!

You can take an optically great photo for a common looking person and he/she make not like it simply because it shows too much of how they look. If you let them recess into the environment and they will be much more happy.

With the same amount of light the 35 is not much slower than the 50/1.4.
 
Nickigirl said:
Which is better for available-light pictures, indoors, in churches,
at night.... mostly people, singly or in small groups... (both are
the same price)
Click to expand...
for the light conditions you specify, f1.4 is better. If you are looking to buy just one - go with 35 f2 for the only reason that it gives you a wider field of vision than the 50mm.

The 35f2 is usable at f2; while the 50 f1.4 is usable at f1.8 - a small difference.

Or buy a used 35-70mm f2.8 - it should cost slightly more (~$250) than a new 50 f1.4...
 
A little - but it's still a great shot that captures the moment....

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...
 
I own both lenses and generally carry both around for low light work.

For me a deciding factor is usage and focal length if you have to pick one or the other, as they are both great lenses.
  • 35mm f/2 is a great "generalist" lens. It isn't quite as usable at very wide apertures as the 50mm, but for walkaround, especially indoors, it's the more useful focal length.
  • 50mm f/1.4 is a bit easily to handhold and stronger with portraiture with the more limited depth of field.
Is this your first prime? Will you use it in the daytime/non low light situations? That can help your decision, as if say you have all the other focal lengths but want some uber sharpeness at a specific focal length, you can key in on that factor.

Nick
http://www.ashotapart.com/ - photoblogging nyc and beyond
 
I have 2 other primes, an 85mm f1.8 and a 60mm f2.8 micro. The 50mm is close in focal length to the micro but much faster.... but maybe the 35mm is better anyways because it's not so close to the 60mm focal length....

I'm leaning towards the 35mm. It seems closer to what I'm planning to use it for.
--
Cheers,
Nicki
 
Nickigirl said:
I'm leaning towards the 35mm. It seems closer to what I'm planning
to use it for.
Click to expand...
The 35 f/2 should serve you well. The 50 is also a very good choice. There's a bit of a trade-off between those two maximum apertures. The f/1.4 will get you a faster shutter speed in extreme situations, but at the same time the depth of focus at f/1.4 is almost paper thin. If your focus isn't absolutely spot on (which won't always be the case when shooting candids from the hip) that increase in shutter speed may not make a lot of difference.

--
'Here, look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey!'

Tom Young
http://www.pbase.com/tyoung/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top