I recently owned my first DSLR, Nikon D5200 that came along with a 18-55 VR kit lens. I added another lens 70-300 VR for my tele zoom needs as well as for the portraits of my lil' daughter. But now i feel that while using my 70-300 for indoor portraits i am too zoomed in.The reason being that 70-300 being an FX lens and my cam being an DX, it is equivalent to 105mm on my SLR. Now i want to add another lens to cover the missing focal range i.e 55mm to 105mm. Since i do most of my photography indoors i also need a high aperture lens. Also that will add more Bokeh effect to my pics. Considering all the above points i have come down to two prime lenses 35mm 1.8G DX and 50mm 1.8 G FX ( 75mm on my DX ). Can't decide which on to go for? What should i do? Plz suggest.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Need a high aperture lens.
- Thread starter Rajfabio
- Start date
Tom_N
Forum Pro
You don't have a "missing focal range" of 55mm to 105mm. You have one of 55mm to 70mm (in 35mm-equivalent terms, 82.5mm to 105mm), which isn't much of a gap at all. (The kit lens being DX doesn't change the meaning of focal length; it just means that the lens does not project a large enough image to properly expose all of the sensor on a 35mm film or full-frame digital camera.)
I think you mean that you want a wide aperture lens (to let in more light).
Bokeh is not shallow depth-of-focus blur (the effect you get with wide apertures, or when taking photos at a long distance using a telephoto lens). It's the subjective quality of the blur.
You do realize that you can simulate the framing of those lenses with your 18-55mm zoom, right? Just turn it to 35mm and leave it there, or turn it to 50mm and leave it there. That won't get you the wider aperture of a prime (you'll need the actual prime for that), but it will help you tell which of the fixed focal lengths will be convenient for your picture taking.
confyushis
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,072
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 197
please keep in mind that focal length is absolute ... a 55-200mm dx lens set to 70mm and a 70-300mm fx lens set to 70mm will give the same field of view on your d5200 (a dx body). try it for yourself:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/
set the focusing length to 70 ... the left set of yellow buttons indicates whether the lens is fx or dx and the right set of yellow buttons indicates whether the camera body is fx or dx (in your case, the d5200 is dx, so select that button).
your focal range gap is 55-70mm ... approx. 6 degrees of view ... not too significant ...
one of your main concerns is that 70mm on your camera is too zoomed in ... if you're trying to choose an appropriate focal length from either 35mm or 50mm, take your 18-55mm lens and take photos with the lens set to 35mm. tape the zoom ring if you need to ... do the same with the lens set to 50mm ... only you will know which focal length you like ...
in order to blur the background and isolate the subject you need to do a few things:
- widen your aperture (f/# where # is lower = more background blur)
- have your subject stand far away from the background (further = more background blur)
- have as long a focal length as you can manage (more mm = more background blur)
- stand as close to your subject as you can (closer to subject = more background blur)
Tom, Being a amateur i have an understanding that in my cam the highest focal length i achieve with my 18-55 kit lens is of course 55mm equivalent. Using this focal length at times i feel i need more zoom (dont wanna go close to the subject). Now to counter that when i put on 70-300 i suddenly feel i am too zoomed in.(dont wanna move away from subject). What i mean is that subject and me being at same places while both these lenses are used, the difference is a lot. I wanted a lense which covers this in between range. I agree that having a wide aperture for my needs is a must but what should i chose? 35mm or 50mm?
Ok. Heres a another way i can explain this.
What i exactly need a focal length of maybe around 85mm. In that case what lens on my DX will have that effect of being at 85mm.(position of the subject and me still being the same).
In my current lenses i can't do that because 18-55 wont zoom across 55mm.
70-300 is too zoomed in at 70mm even and i can't zoom out any more.
So i feel something in between would be great.
What i exactly need a focal length of maybe around 85mm. In that case what lens on my DX will have that effect of being at 85mm.(position of the subject and me still being the same).
In my current lenses i can't do that because 18-55 wont zoom across 55mm.
70-300 is too zoomed in at 70mm even and i can't zoom out any more.
So i feel something in between would be great.
Totally understood and agreed but one question.
Using a prime DX35mm lens and a prime FX 35mm Lens on a D5200 will have same frame?
Or
Like i am understanding that 50mm DX lens and a 35mm FX lens on a D5200would almost give same frame?
FX lens on a DX cam=1.5 focal length approx.
Plz guide.
Using a prime DX35mm lens and a prime FX 35mm Lens on a D5200 will have same frame?
Or
Like i am understanding that 50mm DX lens and a 35mm FX lens on a D5200would almost give same frame?
FX lens on a DX cam=1.5 focal length approx.
Plz guide.
Chris R-UK
Forum Pro
They are both 35mm lenses so they will have identical angles of view, i.e the same composition.
No. A 50mm lens on a full frame body like a D800 will give approximately the same angle of view as a 35mm lens on an APS-C body. If you use them both on an APS-C body you will get different angles of view because they are different focal lengths.
No. It is the camera body's sensor that determines the crop factor and hence the angle of view, not whether the lens is FX or DX.
Try reading some of the posts on this thread again. If you have a language problem it might be worth looking for a photographic website in your own language.
Last edited:
confyushis
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,072
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 197
yes
no
no
a 50mm (DX or FX does not matter) on a d5200 (DX body) is the same field of view as 75mm (FX lens) on a FX body.
cprevost
Senior Member
If your focal gap is between 55 and 70 you could easily make that up by stepping closer to your subject with the 55mm. Unless you have to stand in one spot to shoot you really don't have a focal gap. You do have an aperture gap. The 35 or the 50 with a wider aperture would work better for low light. I find a 50 to be a bit restrictive indoors because I often can't get far away enough to compose a shot. 35 is more versatile indoors. 50 may be better outdoors? If you wan't shallow depth of field you can use your big zoom and zoom all the way out with the largest aperture and you'll get pretty creamy bokeh for sure.
PhD4
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,616
- Reaction score
- 1,282
If your goal is a large aperture (fast) 85mm'ish lens on your APS-C camera...
Then you need to shoot for the 50-55mm range.
So some options are:
- 50/1.2
- 50/1.4
- 50/1.8
- 24-70/2.8 zoom
- 17-55/2.8 zoom
Pricey though.... for an entry level camera.
Tom_N
Forum Pro
It is 55mm in absolute terms, not in 35mm-equivalent terms.
Both the 55mm setting on the kit lens (82.5mm-equivalent on an APS-C sensor) and the 70mm setting on the telephoto lens (105mm-equivalent on an APS-C sensor) are likely to be cramped for indoor people photography unless you have a lot of space.
For full frame cameras, we had: 28mm (groups), 50mm (normal), 85mm (portrait), 135mm (very close-up portrait). But even 85mm was often cramped indoors. The equivalents to these on a Nikon DX camera would be, roughly: 18mm (groups), 35mm (normal), 50mm (portrait), 85mm (very close-up portrait).
I'd say that the 35mm lens would be most versatile, while the 50mm lens might encourage you to back off a bit from your subject (thus producing a more pleasing perspective). But neither of the lenses you are considering is in the "in-between range"; both are within the range of your kit lens.
sherwoodpete
Veteran Member
"Need a high aperture lens."
There's no such animal.
An aperture is a gap or space. Think of it like a window which admits light.
A high window or a low window makes no difference to its size.
In the context of photography, the aperture may be referred to as large and small, wide and narrow, or even fast and slow. These terms are meaningful.
Regards,
Peter
There's no such animal.
An aperture is a gap or space. Think of it like a window which admits light.
A high window or a low window makes no difference to its size.
In the context of photography, the aperture may be referred to as large and small, wide and narrow, or even fast and slow. These terms are meaningful.
Regards,
Peter
PhD4
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,616
- Reaction score
- 1,282
The numbers involved with aperture... can be "high" and "low".
And while the OP meant low.... somehow everyone else here figured it out and found a way to help him.
Johann3s
Member
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 34
If the amount of subject isolation is important for you, you can look at this background blur calculator. For the the two lenses you give as an option, the 50mm will give more background blur in all situations. This is because the aperture is the same, while it has a longer focal length.
You want a lens which is wider, so the only other consideration you have to make is if 50mm is wide enough. If it is: go for it.
You want a lens which is wider, so the only other consideration you have to make is if 50mm is wide enough. If it is: go for it.
iancrowe
Senior Member
Hmm...
You seem to be asking two separate questions here:-
1) What lens could I use to fill the gap between my 18-55 and my 70-300 lenses.
2) Which of the two fast prime lenses (35 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.8) would be better for me.
As to question 1 I would suggest you consider Sigma's 17-70 f/2.8-4.0 DC OS HSM macro lens to replace your kit lens. This will not only fill the gap between 55 and 70mm but is also gives you an extra stop of light and shallower depth of field across the range.
For question 2 I suggest you try leaving your kit lens set at 35mm for a number of shots then set it to 50mm for a similar set of pictures and see which focal length you prefer working with then get that prime lens.
Hope this helps
Ian
iancrowe
Senior Member
Did you never consider that English might not be the OP's native language. This is after all an International forum.
Your answer is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
Iasn
bugzie
Senior Member
Why are you considering a 35mm or a 50mm prime when you have 18-55 on your kit zoom? Your kit zoom covers 18-55 taking in 35mm and 50mm. All lenses are designated as 35mm to save any confusion whether your camera is DX or full-frame. Even DX lenses are designated as 35mm focal lengths. You're chopping and changing your terminology and getting yourself confused. Your "missing" focal lengths are 55-70mm. You have 35mm and 50mm covered. Classic portrait lenses are 85mm. There are 60mm macro lenses but there's not much else between 55-70mm in a prime. Yes, you could get the 24-70mm but that's a very expensive lens. I think you need to get your head straight before you part with that kind of cash. When you learn a little more you might find that you would have preferred to spend that money on something quite different.
You don't have to have every focal length covered. If you do get a 35mm or 50mm prime, you are going to have to move your feet. Everybody should probably have one prime so they start to move their feet. And get some understanding of the difference between zooming and moving your feet. For example, I don't switch from one prime or another to get me closer to the subject, I do it more often to change the perspective of the shot.
In terms of out of focus effects you can play with focal length... like back up and use more telephoto and you'll get shallower depth of field. Technically focal length doesn't affect depth of field but for our practical purposes it does have a noticeable effect.
As for a faster lens... a lens with a wider maximum aperture, and when used at wider apertures, it will let more light in and will give shallower depth of field. The thing with fast lenses is sometimes you might have to use it at f/5.6 or smaller to get adequate depth of field for some shots. Some lenses do nicer things to the out-of-focus areas. Some lenses are "nervous" and some are "creamy". The Nikkor 85mm 1.4 has a reputation for its beautiful rendering of out-of-focus areas. It's good at smaller apertures too. There's a difference between shallow depth of field and the pleasant rendering of out of focus areas we call "bokeh". But you can get some nice bokeh out of any lens if you're careful with the choice of background.
I'd suggest sticking with what you have until you understand things a little better. A 50mm prime can be a good supplement to what you have in that they can be fast lenses that can be had for relatively little cash. And, as I said, it's good to work with primes so you start to move your feet. On the hand, many people find 50mm on DX a rather useless focal length (75mm equivalent) and prefer the 35mm which, on DX is more a "normal" lens.
You don't have to have every focal length covered. If you do get a 35mm or 50mm prime, you are going to have to move your feet. Everybody should probably have one prime so they start to move their feet. And get some understanding of the difference between zooming and moving your feet. For example, I don't switch from one prime or another to get me closer to the subject, I do it more often to change the perspective of the shot.
In terms of out of focus effects you can play with focal length... like back up and use more telephoto and you'll get shallower depth of field. Technically focal length doesn't affect depth of field but for our practical purposes it does have a noticeable effect.
As for a faster lens... a lens with a wider maximum aperture, and when used at wider apertures, it will let more light in and will give shallower depth of field. The thing with fast lenses is sometimes you might have to use it at f/5.6 or smaller to get adequate depth of field for some shots. Some lenses do nicer things to the out-of-focus areas. Some lenses are "nervous" and some are "creamy". The Nikkor 85mm 1.4 has a reputation for its beautiful rendering of out-of-focus areas. It's good at smaller apertures too. There's a difference between shallow depth of field and the pleasant rendering of out of focus areas we call "bokeh". But you can get some nice bokeh out of any lens if you're careful with the choice of background.
I'd suggest sticking with what you have until you understand things a little better. A 50mm prime can be a good supplement to what you have in that they can be fast lenses that can be had for relatively little cash. And, as I said, it's good to work with primes so you start to move your feet. On the hand, many people find 50mm on DX a rather useless focal length (75mm equivalent) and prefer the 35mm which, on DX is more a "normal" lens.
sherwoodpete
Veteran Member
Thank you for the encouraging words.
My point was worth making because I've seen the terms high and low used when referring to apertures with completely opposite meanings. Some people think a low aperture is very big, others think it is very small.
If wide/narrow are used instead, there is less possibility of confusion.
Regards,
Peter
Duckysaurus
Active member
Why not just get a (DX) 35mm 1.8G or a (FX) 50mm 1.8G and just move your feet back? You are worrying too much about equipment as opposed to working with what you have (increases creativity and forces you to rely more on skill and composition).
With DX cameras, it's always easier to get portraint/telephoto equivalents if you just move your feet back. If you have a really sharp lens (both are extremely sharp and under $220 each) such as the two I mentioned and simply move back, it will work well.
I mean, I love to shoot at 35mm focal length at f/1.4 to f/4, but instead of getting both a super-wide and a 35mm prime, I simply chose the 24mm 1.4. For my 35mm equivalent shots, I just move closer to the subject.
I'm sure most here will concur with the 35mm 1.8G (it's like a 52.5mm on your DSLR), or the 50mm 1.8G (like a 75mm). Just move your feet!
With DX cameras, it's always easier to get portraint/telephoto equivalents if you just move your feet back. If you have a really sharp lens (both are extremely sharp and under $220 each) such as the two I mentioned and simply move back, it will work well.
I mean, I love to shoot at 35mm focal length at f/1.4 to f/4, but instead of getting both a super-wide and a 35mm prime, I simply chose the 24mm 1.4. For my 35mm equivalent shots, I just move closer to the subject.
I'm sure most here will concur with the 35mm 1.8G (it's like a 52.5mm on your DSLR), or the 50mm 1.8G (like a 75mm). Just move your feet!
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum