Hi everyone,
I currently have a 35mm 1.8 lens for my Nikon D80. I LOVE it. My husband wants to buy me a present for Valentinte's Day and our anniversary, so he said he would buy the 50mm 1.4. Is it worth it if I already have a 35mm 1.8? Below is a picture I've taken with the 35mm. Is there another lens you would recommend? I have a 35mm 1.8 and a Tamron 28-75 2.8. I would love a macro lens, but think they might be more than he's willing to spend. Thanks in advance!!!
well I think you can answer that question... have you ever used your 35mm and found it too short, but your 28-75 too slow? If you answer yes to both those you could use the 50... but I am sure there is a macro solution out there and if you picked up a 100mm macro you'd have a new range of lens too...
I had a 50mm 1.8 and liked the 35mm better, so that's why I'm hesitant on buying the 1.4. I was just wondering if the lower f-stop was really worth it. I wish they made a 50mm 1.2 in autofocus for Nikon :(
I think your photo speaks for itself: I checked your EXIF data, and you shot the photo at f/2.2. Go back through your photos and ask yourself this question: what is the widest aperture you've ever used (smallest number)?
I have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and it is an amazing lens. It's always nice to have a zoom lens in your bag because sometimes you just don't have the time to move into a better position to frame a photo with a prime lens.
@icywarm@aes981
the macro lens to look at (for nikon) is the Tokina 100mm f/2.8. nikon fanboy and web's resident douche ken rockwell waxed poetic about this lens, gaining close to full marks on his reviews. the guy might not be a very good photographer, but he knows his stuff. and apparently even though most folks in photog forums hate the guy, they somehow agree with most of his reviews. the Tokina's priced at ~USD400.
the 35mm f/1.8 is my fave as well, but i am turned off by its barrel distortion, and when i finally got the 50mm f/1.8, i was floored, it's so much better (for me) and the portraits are much tighter. i'm betting the 50mm f/1.4 will be much much sweeter, but if you are looking for a macro within the same price range, the Tokina's worth checking out.
Yes a 50 is better for portraits... find a 85mm 1.4 or 1.2 and you will wonder how you ever used 50 for portraits... like moving from B&W to Colour. (in the sense that it is cool and amazing, not that B&W is worse than colour)
the only problem i have with 35mm f/1.8 is that.. the DOF is very shallow... and oh it's made as a wide angled lens so, i dunno why i bought it, maybe because of the f stop it has... hihihihi if u see, sometimes, when u take portraits with 35mm it's kind of stretched but it's fine.. =)
i'd love to have a 50mm f 1.4.. they say it's good for everyday use.. but a macro lens, THAT'S A "TO-DIE-FOR" for me... =)
you got some great range with lenses huh... and oh your husband's soooo sweet! he supports you all the way! =)
You could always rent both and see which one you like better. To rent one for a weekend would run you about $40. Better to see what you definitely want than maybe make an investment mistake.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
nikon users? Cheaper 100mm macro?
Is this a good deal? http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-AF-105MM-2-8D-MICRO-MINT-COND-L-K-53-764-/300522792009?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item45f88de449#ht_838wt_1858
I have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and it is an amazing lens. It's always nice to have a zoom lens in your bag because sometimes you just don't have the time to move into a better position to frame a photo with a prime lens.
the macro lens to look at (for nikon) is the Tokina 100mm f/2.8. nikon fanboy and web's resident douche ken rockwell waxed poetic about this lens, gaining close to full marks on his reviews. the guy might not be a very good photographer, but he knows his stuff. and apparently even though most folks in photog forums hate the guy, they somehow agree with most of his reviews. the Tokina's priced at ~USD400.
the 35mm f/1.8 is my fave as well, but i am turned off by its barrel distortion, and when i finally got the 50mm f/1.8, i was floored, it's so much better (for me) and the portraits are much tighter. i'm betting the 50mm f/1.4 will be much much sweeter, but if you are looking for a macro within the same price range, the Tokina's worth checking out.
Yes a 50 is better for portraits... find a 85mm 1.4 or 1.2 and you will wonder how you ever used 50 for portraits... like moving from B&W to Colour. (in the sense that it is cool and amazing, not that B&W is worse than colour)
i'd love to have a 50mm f 1.4.. they say it's good for everyday use.. but a macro lens, THAT'S A "TO-DIE-FOR" for me... =)
you got some great range with lenses huh... and oh your husband's soooo sweet! he supports you all the way! =)
HAPPY ANNIVERSARY and VALENTINES! =)