Vs. 35 50

Many Nikon CZK users, after a certain period of time, want to try, in addition to their standard “dark” zooms, some fast lens. Most often, their choice stops at 2 lenses: Nikon Nikkor AF-S 35mm 1: 1.8G DX Aspherical и Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical. This article discusses these lenses exclusively for use on cameras. Nikon DX.

About lenses

About lenses

Features Nikon Nikkor AF-S 35mm 1: 1.8G DX Aspherica

  • Suitable only for cropped Nikon DX cameras with 52,5mm equivalent focal length. In order to avoid confusion in the comments to this article, I repeat once again that the focal length is a physical quantity, indicated for objects, regardless of whether it is a cropped lens or not. Many photographers use the EGF concept to their advantage, which is described in more detail. here. On full-format cameras, using this lens is not recommended. Who cares link You will find sample shots taken with this lens and a full-format camera in FX crop mode.
  • slightly cheaper than its competitor.
  • has a real internal focus mode, in which the front lens remains stationary
  • diameter of light filters - 52mm. Unlike 58mm for 50s, filters of this diameter can be a little cheaper.
  • It has no indicators and marks at all (except for a point for docking with the camera mount). This can be considered the most truncated lens design.
  • the aperture can close up to F / 22, which in very rare situations will be better than the competitor's F / 16.
  • viewing angle is wider than that of a competitor, which is important for indoor shooting.
  • The lens has been available since spring 2009.

Features Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical

  • Suitable for both full-size Nikon FX cameras and Nikon DX cropped cameras. When used on a crop, the equivalent focal length is 75mm.
  • has a depth of field scale for F / 16, which the amateur photographer is unlikely to be useful.
  • the diameter of the front light filter is 58mm, slightly larger than that of the 35mm.
  • has a focusing distance scale, which is a nice difference from its competitor. For the amateur photographer who is used to shooting with automatic focusing, such a scale will not be in demand, but it has one pleasant property - looking at it you immediately know in which direction you need to rotate the focusing ring. The 35-point does not have a scale and you will have to remember in which direction you will have to rotate the focusing ring in manual mode to reach infinity or the minimum focusing distance. Of course, the docking mark with the camera mount is present.
  • the lens does not have real internal focusing, but because of its peculiarities, there will be no difficulties with this, because the front lens moves only in the middle of the frame of the body and for simplicity, we can assume that focusing, like that of the 35-ton, is internal (and if we add protective filter then there are no differences).
  • autofocus speed is slightly faster than the 35-tki.
  • the lens more blurred the background, which is sometimes better for creative or portrait shooting
  • The lens has been available since spring 2011 and is 2 years younger than the competitor.
  • the lens has a narrower viewing angle. Because of what, with this lens, you will have to further move away from the subject.

I want to note that the lenses have a lot of similarities:

  • both have a built-in focusing motor like SWM and will automatically work on any Nikon DSLR camera.
  • both lenses have a metal mount.
  • no aperture control ring.
  • there is a constant manual focus control Nikon M / A.
  • focus mode switch M / AM.
  • the same number of aperture blades - 7 pieces.
  • make them only in China.
  • in the optical design, both lenses have one aspherical element, for which it’s not a pity to pay money.
  • Each lens comes with a lens hood that can be installed back and forth.
  • lenses have different minimum focusing distances, but the magnification factor is almost the same. Roughly speaking, macro shots are of the same level.

My experience

I used Nikon 35 / 1.8G for 1-1.5 years, I shot on Nikon 50 / 1.8G during two weeks of my vacation and occasionally borrow the lens from my partner. I would like to point out that both lenses are actually very good lenses and are unlikely to be disappointed with the photo quality of either lens.

But the slightly slower focusing speed of the 35th and its visually stronger distortion and sometimes very strong chromatic aberration at f / 1.8 they prefer my Nikon 50 / 1.8G. When I started shooting less and less on Nikon DX cameras, I sold a 35-ton, replacing it with a full-length Nikon 50 / 1.4G (but that's another story).

A funny moment - in the official video of the camera presentation Nikon D5200 (link to video, 1:28 min) the Nikon 35 / 1.8G lens is called a portrait lens, and the photo shows a face portrait of a girl. I would like to point out that even on Nikon DX 35mm cameras it is by no means an analogy. classic portrait lens. In other commercials, for example Nikon D3200 (link to video, 1:30 min) Nikon calls the 35-tku lens for blur background, which is sometimes really important for portraiture. Of course, on Nikon 35 / 1.8G no one forbids taking portraits :)

I think the Nikon 35 / 1.8G is better suited as one single prime lens “for all occasions”. And as a supplement to the stock zoom lens, the Nikon 50 / 1.8G will be much more interesting. Of course, everyone must draw their own conclusions for themselves.

Leave your opinions and reviews in the comments, help newcomers to decide on their choice.

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. For the selection of a variety of photographic equipment, I recommend E-Catalog, Socket и AliExpress.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval... Look for me on Youtube | Facebook | VK | Instagram | Twitter.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 296, on the topic: 35 vs 50

  • novice

    Good day.
    Give a 35mm 1.8 for
    Is the scenery good too?

  • Victoria

    My head hurts and what to take for portraits and weddings ... corporate events ??? enough money for one.

    • BB

      As a "reporter" - corporate parties, weddings - a good zoom like 17-50, a portrait lens is from 85mm.
      One lens is not enough.

      • Victoria

        I unfortunately have no money for this lens!

  • anonym

    Used 35 dx 1.5 years. I can’t say anything good except for the aperture and focal comfort ... The picture quality is mediocre bokeh is not interesting. In general, the picture gives off plastic ... So it seems that it is simply plastic inside. I think these thoughts are not far from the truth.

    • yarkiy

      You just have not yet managed to unleash the potential of this lens, I also thought so at first. But now, after 3.5 years of use, I can quite responsibly declare that the picture quality is excellent, the bokeh if you shoot for the sake of bokeh is great, what is the criterion “the picture gives with plastic”, I had a Holga 60mm pinhole with only one plastic lens and a constant f8 aperture for lomography, and with this golimy plastic, wonderful things were obtained that did not give away any plastic.
      Shoot more in different scenes, with time and experience comes awareness and understanding.

  • Novel

    Hello dear specialists, they didn’t find out until the end of 35 Ali 50. Please tell me in my case D3100 + 18-105, which fix to buy 35 or 50. Thanks for the answer.

    • Rodion

      I would take 35/2 if you need a station wagon. And 50 / 1.8 / 50 / 1.4, if you need a short portrait, in addition to zoom.

  • Igor

    With technology, I’ve sorted it out, but with cats, all the pictures are cool, but what’s the secret, like seeing the picture of a professional amator? (taking pictures 20 rock ago, Vilya-auto, now buying a V7000, there I’m there at 55, F 2,8, I’ll buy 85-kz, I’ll buy a backpack and 2 lights, I’ve already read my head and I’ve got a lot of fluff and I’ll ???)

    • BB

      How to distinguish a pro from an amateur?
      - very simple: pro - with a badge))

  • Egor

    The question is practical. If I have 18-105DX and I want to understand what angle of view will be on the crop when using 50mmFX, then I need to set 50 or 75mm on my lens.

    • Valery A.

      50. Does not play the role of PF or DX, the focal length is the same.

      • anonym

        Thank you

  • master-off.net

    nikon 3100 + 50 mm 1,8. I want a wide-angle lens for common scenes. Is it worth buying 35 mm 1,8? Will I feel the difference?

    • Denis

      Yes. but better buy a zoom, for example 18-105

      • Oleg

        18-105 / 1.8 ???

    • Oleg

      Of course. 50 sell 35 buy

  • Alexander

    There are available 35 1,8, yuzal on D90. Now I switched to full frame. Tell me, does it make sense to sell a 35-ku and buy a fifty dollars, or leave a 35-ku and use it in crop mode on FF? Will the picture be very different from 50 1,8?

    • KalekseyG

      DOF will be more than 50

    • Oleg

      What is the point (IMHO) to use FF in crop mode?
      KalekseyG correctly indicates that the depth of field will be greater for 35, and the coverage and perspective will be almost the same.

    • Pastor

      By the way, 35 1.8dh almost completely covers ff, so you can use it in crop mode and, in some cases, in full-frame mode. The flu calculator will help you figure out the depth of field.

  • Nat

    Tell me with a choice. Need a portrait, on the crop nikon d7200. Which is better to take 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8
    On crop, of course, there will be another FR. Here I am changing. Shooting exclusively on the street.

    • Valery A.

      Why do you think that the crop will be different, did you sell your FF camera and switch to crop? If you have a whale like 18-105, put 50 and 85mm on it, the same angles will be on the fixes. Will suit "length" 85mm - take 85 / 1,8, it is more portrait for front-chest portraits, blurred bokeh.

  • Alexey

    I did not suffer with a choice. I bought two at once :) I’m renting on the D3300. Both lenses are good. Get more to shoot at 35mm, tk. focal is still more convenient for everyday shooting.

    • Niko

      Now I also have both 35mm and 50mi on the d3200 camera, I think that it would be optimal to immediately buy 35. 50 is a bit much for DX.

  • Аман

    Hello experts!) On the Nikon D5100, which lens will be better: 35 mm or 50 mm?

    • Michael

      Watching for what. How regular is better 35

  • Ivan

    Please tell me which of these two lenses is better for painting. Photographing works of art, convey in the best way the picture, the color of the picture. If both of these lenses do not fit, then which other will handle this task in a similar price category. Thanks.

    • anonym

      Better than 50, because 35 has quite a noticeable distortion, but 50 also has it. Therefore, 85 1.8g is better, which, unfortunately, is more expensive. You can also pay attention to the line of macro lenses

    • Vitaly N

      You should first decide on the focal length - in the museum you can not always move away. Of course 85 mm is more ideal, but you will most likely have to use 35 mm. And distortion is corrected either by the camera itself or by the editor.

      • Ivan

        There is no problem with distance, since it is more for personal needs, and not for museums. But in rehab, you will often have to use it, that's a fact. Of course I want more quality in this price category (+ -). For now) and of course universality for other needs. Carcass D5300. Distortion was really one of the main problems when I used simpler cameras earlier. There is always a lot of writing everywhere, but so far I haven’t met a lot of information on photographing paintings.

        • Vitaly N

          So look in the properties of the images on which focal lengths were previously filmed, recalculate the EGF taking into account the crop. 35 ki has more distortion, but it is also more versatile. Its EGF is 52,5 mm (35 * 1,5). Kropfactor of old cameras can be found in the internet. Of course, the longer the focal length possible, the better. You probably shouldn't worry about distortion - you will still edit the perspective in the editor. It is difficult to photograph strictly along the axis - it seems to be exactly on the screen, when viewed there will be sides of different sizes.

          • Ivan

            Thank you.

    • Denis

      try makrik 40mm 2.8G. In any case, it’s better for this than 35 or 50 1.8G
      he has almost no distortion and excellent sharpness

  • Danil

    Please tell me, is there a Nikon d3300 crop camera, if I put a Nikon AF-S 50mm F1.8 G Nikkor lens on it, the focal length remains the same 50ml or it will increase and become more than 50ml due to the fact that this is a crop camera ..?
    I can’t figure out what to buy on my camera to get my favorite 50ml like on the DX whale lens)))
    Usage scenario, portraits of people on the street.

    • Dmitriy

      Take the Nikon 35 1.8G DX.
      You will get 35x1.5 = 52,5mm

    • Dmitriy

      If you buy 50 / 1.8G, then there will already be 75mm ether.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      The viewing angle (roughly EGF) with the Nikon 50 / 1.8G will be exactly the same as on the 18-55 whale lens (or any other zoom lens) set to 50 mm. Not otherwise and without any other options.
      The rule is simple: EGF for Nikon DX cameras is always recounted with any DX or FX lens without any exceptions. Therefore, a whale lens 18-55 by 50 mm gives an EGF of 75 mm and a lens 50 / 1.8G gives an EGF of 75 mm.

  • Nadezhda

    I ask for help with the choice between Yongnuo 100 mm and Nikkor 50mm on cropp
    I take it for portraits, mostly indoors. There is 35, but I don't like it at all ...
    I would be grateful for your help!

    • Rodion

      100 mm indoors on a crop - 150 mm. This is overkill.

  • Niko

    Please tell me what to choose for good quality pictures 35mm 1.8 or 40mm 2,8 macro. For D3200. Thanks in advance.

    • Vitaly N

      If you don't need a macro, then 35. And the aperture is almost 2.5 times higher.

  • Gennady

    For the umpteenth time I’ve been reading an article and comments, but I just can’t understand if the article explicitly states that we are talking about DX, why do commentators drag a FF here? The article compares two specific lenses, but for some reason commentators dragged here emotions from using completely different lenses.
    Just imagine: a man went into a cafe, flipped through a menu, chose two specific dishes, and they brought him a trough of some vinaigrette, where they had cut everything that came to hand. Would the client want to go to such a cafe again?

    • Viktorych

      instead of the taste of two dishes, he recognized a dozen more! Got richer! Thanks to all!

  • Yuliya

    Good evening! I ask for advice. I have a d3400 camera, lens 55-200, 18-55, 35 prime. Is it worth taking another 50 fix or feeding and taking 85 mm. But the difference in price is almost 2 times scary ...

    • Roman

      Usually it is customary to take fixes with a coefficient of about 2. For example, 24 - 50 - 100 (135) - 200. Or 20 - 35 - 85 - 150.

      See your most common focal points. Lock 18-55 at the far end (or 55-200 at the near), walk around, take a day with him. Then try the same on focus 85. It's all very individual. On the one hand, you give preference to certain focal points, you are comfortable with them. On the other hand, if you take a new fix and try to shoot with it, you can find a whole lot of techniques and plots that you did not pay attention to before. I sometimes arrange the day when I take a lens from a shelf and walk only with it - it is often very interesting.

      • Yuliya

        Thanks for the advice) I think that if I buy a lens, I will use it anyway. It just seems to me that there is no point in buying a 50mm, tk. it will not differ much from 35 mm. If you take into account the coefficient that you mentioned, it turns out that you need to take 85mm. I myself am more inclined towards him - I really want to try to shoot close-up portraits, but the price is too biting for an amateur photographer🙈

  • Vlad

    I will share my experience, if anyone is interested) I decided to purchase a fast aperture, I chose between these two lenses for a long time. I wanted something universal, including for shooting in small rooms, for which 50 mm is sometimes a bit too much. At the same time, 50 / 1.8 attracted fast autofocus and better blur. In the end, I decided to order both of these lenses with delivery to the store and choose on the spot. On the same site was sigma 30 / 1.4 art at a discount, only 2000 more expensive than 50 / 1.8. I also ordered her. In the store he twisted, took off one, second, third. 35ka is not bad, but it focuses slowly. 50ka focuses quickly, but not at all where it is needed, with either a shortage or a flight. Maybe a marriage. Sigma focused faster and more accurately than anyone else. According to the picture: there was no time to carefully study, but offhand: the degree of blur for 30 / 1.4 and 50 / 1.8 is about the same level, 35 is slightly worse. The sharpness of all is not bad if they hit the target. Both Nikon lenses in their hands are felt with plastic toys: lightweight, the focus ring rotates and fastens when rotated, if you shake, something massive is hanging inside. And sigma: perfectly assembled, a weighty piece of glass, rubber and metal. As a result, a sigma was purchased, while there is no reason to regret it) a good choice for everyone))

  • Igor

    Tell me, I have 5600, on a whale 18-55 when photographing the same size of an object at the very minimum distance, when using 35-1.8 or 50-1.8, will the distance from the camera to the object increase or decrease? Thank you +380674302337 V

    • B. R. P.

      They have different mdf. To maintain the same scale with 35 1,8 you need to come closer. If I generally understood the essence of your question.

    • Vlad

      With the d5600, the af-p 18-55 kit usually comes. He has a very small mdf, and, accordingly, a high magnification ratio of 1: 2.6. It will allow you to get a larger image than 35 1.8,50 1.8 (magnification ratio 1: 6.3)

  • Lee

    Hello. What is better to get 35 or 50 for shooting historical sights (in a main estate), family ..?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      35mm

  • Alexander

    Tell me the moment, there is a whale 18-55, I plan to take 35mm 1.8g to blur the background, does it make sense?

    • Michael

      Yes, but “for blurring the background” a larger focal length is better (50, 85)

      • Alexander

        Thank you

      • Alexander

        I would like to note what is taken for the crop, will there be a noticeable difference in bokeh between 35 and 50mm?

        • Michael

          Will be. It will be difficult to shoot in full growth. A half-length portrait should be fine. You have 18-55 - put 50mm on it and see for yourself))

        • Trueash

          The amount of blur determines not only the size of the aperture, but also the distance from the camera to the model, and from the model to the background. The closer the model and the further the background, the stronger the blur will be.
          But if you shoot at 35 mm point-blank - and even more so at 24 - noticeable perspective distortion will go. If these are flowers or an architectural detail, then this may be good, but not very good for a human face. Although portraits are shot at 16 mm ...
          In general, look, choose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3Z0H-FbfZ4

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Better 50 1.8 for blur

      • Alexander

        Thank you for your help, there is another question, whether 50mm will go for a full-length photo or to the waist, since apparently it goes more for a face portrait, I hardly do such.

        • Novel

          50 on crop is a moderate telephoto. Any telephoto lens, even the long-range one, can shoot any portraits if you can keep the distance to the model. For fifty dollars, these will be quite decent full-length portraits with good separation from the background, but, for example, to take a full-length model in a typical 3 by 5 by 50 mm room, you will need to open with the model in different corners of the room. And the background is separated the better the further it is from the model. Therefore, either a large studio or a street.

        • Novel

          For more or less free street style shooting, all sorts of genre scenes, when you are in the same room with the model (or models), preferably something like 24mm cropped (35-37 in full frame), so that you don't feel cramped and also grabbing the interiors and furnishings. 35 will be already cramped, 50 is almost unbearable, something waist-length with a bunch of restrictions, more than 50 is simply impossible.

  • Azake

    I bought with the first crop camera from Kenon at once and fifty as the cheapest lens from the series, less. I didn’t like the quality of the whale, but I didn’t use the fifty-kopeck piece either. Inconvenient focal length. Even at the zenith, I remember suffering with his 58mm helios. The coverage angle was often lacking. No wonder, after all, on the most expensive soap dishes from Sony for 4 thousand dollars. there is one non-replaceable 35mm lens. It turns out 35mm is the most universal fr, and not 58mm as engineers and photographers thought and wrote in their smart books. But of course, if you have money, you need to take both glasses for a full frame. And for those with a 50mm crop, this is an almost useless lens. I see that many will buy it because of the price and then sell it.

    • Azake

      It turns out that for a crop camera you need a fix in the area of ​​24mm, rather than 35mm. But definitely not 50mm.

      • Rodion

        Yes! That is why there is a wonderful 24 / 2.8 native on canoncrop.

    • Novel

      58 and 55 mm - focal lengths, allowing you to get the simplest possible optical scheme on a DSLR with a normal aperture ratio, not clinging to the mirror.

      But a 50 / 1.8 crop works like a good portrait lens, so considering its price it should definitely be. Just pairing it with 24 / 2.8 does not really hurt. Just on a full frame with a fifty-kopeck piece, 40 / 2.8 looks indistinct, I practically don't use it. 10-18 on the bottom, 55-250 on top, 24 / 2.8 with a fifty dollar in the middle and, in fact, you don't need anything else.

  • Artem

    Great article. I will express my humble opinion on this issue.
    Two years ago, when I began to get seriously involved in photography, I was guided by this very article when choosing the first fix. I chose 35mm 1.8g, since I needed a station wagon, and I made the right decision. The glass is excellent, I did not remove it from the carcass for a long time, I liked it so much after the wretched whale. Then I bought half a bottle, as I wanted a portrait lens, but there was no money for 85mm. Then the money appeared and I bought the 85, and I didn't really need half a barrel, and over time I began to notice that the 35 was no longer very suitable for me as a staff, because I was losing a wide angle. Sold 35 and 50 and bought a Sigma 17-50mm F2.8.
    And here is my opinion as follows:
    Nikon 35mm 1.8g is excellent glass. Lightweight, compact, cheap, fast, sharp, with excellent (especially after the whale) pattern. Theoretically and practically, it may be the only universal lens, but it is better, of course, to have a kit for a wide angle at hand.
    Nikon 50mm 1.8g - all characteristics are similar to the 35-ke, but there can be no single glass on the crop: the view is too narrow. Although optically it is better than 35.
    I'm glad that I managed to use both fixes, but based on my experience, I can say that it is better to buy Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 instead of any of the listed fixes. Although it is 1,3 stops darker than the fixes, it is 2 stops lighter than the whale, so the increase in quality after the whale will be very noticeable. Believe me, 2,8 aperture is enough for many creative tasks, including portraits. And you don't have to constantly change lenses, and the wide angle will be.

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2014/01/35-vs-50/