Nifty 50? I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding...

stevetassi

I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding myself shooting a little of everything. Should I invest in a 50mm lens or am I wasting money by purchasing one?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

stevetassi wrote:

I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding myself shooting a little of everything. Should I invest in a 50mm lens or am I wasting money by purchasing one?

Do you need a faster lens for low light work, and if so, what will you be shooting? One to two stops faster can make a big difference in low light (and subject isolation), but the question is should it be a 35, 50 or an 85 or?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Up to you.
The 70 is close to the 50, the 24-120 covers the 50,
the only thing would be, do you need something close to a ƒ1.8 or lower for the 50?
ƒ2.8 not sufficient for low light?

Quixdraw Loc: x

Have several 50's, factually, I use them only for travel when going out in the late afternoon, planning return to hotel at night. They are small, unobtrusive, and fast. I have a range from 1.2 - 1.8. If for some reason you wanted to shoot a 50 all day, you certainly could and zoom with your feet. Another consideration is that most are comparatively inexpensive - less of a loss from theft or misadventure. I also used one (the 1.2) when I shot my son's wedding & reception (there were Pros as well) - very satisfactory.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

quixdraw wrote:

Have several 50's, factually, I use them only for ... (show quote)

I agree. I find that I use my 85 f1.8 indoors so much, I’m considering either a fast 50 or a faster 85. I shot my son’s entire wedding with the 85 (and no flash), even though it was professionally photographed also, and I had a number of alternative lenses in the car. As I write this, I’m headed to my son’s home to meet (and photograph) my new granddaughter, and I bought a 50 f2 for my Fuji crop body specifically for the moment.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

stevetassi wrote:

I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding myself shooting a little of everything. Should I invest in a 50mm lens or am I wasting money by purchasing one?

Yes, a lot of nifty fifty advocates and I just had to have one. I think I used it six or eight months ago.

Nice lens and has it's place, but I usually have the 24-70 or 24-120 on and somehow survive. Obviously it depends upon what usage you think you will have and above all else, you must be happy!

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

stevetassi wrote:

I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding myself shooting a little of everything. Should I invest in a 50mm lens or am I wasting money by purchasing one?

Careful when buying a 50mm lens. Many of the less expensive ones are soft wide open and don't get sharp for a stop or two. Personally, I'd recommend an 85mm f/1.8. Since you already own Tamron glass, I'd go with their version to save a few $$. Another thing to consider is a good macro lens, somewhere around 105mm.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I had a 50 f1.8 before I ever had a 2.8. Just playing around in the living room I found that the 50 sucks in a lot more light than a 2.8. It gives you that added possibility of shooting without flash indoors. I remember 50 years ago when the 50mm lens was the normal lens for photography. We just used our feet to zoom in or out. It worked. Ofc, we'd often have a zoom lens that would cover 80-300mm or something similar for sports. Those two lenses were all that were in the bag and all we needed (or I needed). For $135, go for it. If you're shooting dx, you might consider a 35mm. On a dx, I've found that a 50mm gives problems getting the entire dinner table in at holidays. No such problem on full frames.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

stevetassi a 50mm prime on a full frame i.e. D750 is a tad wide for portraiture... results in a "cartoon" like exaggeration which is ubiquitous on Instagram cellphone selfies and such. You should maybe start your search at 75 to 80mm for portraiture in my humble estimation. An yes a fast prime is to be cherished!

Why? Fast glass can (and does ) impart an ethereal aura oft found in fashion and beauty genre.
What do I use? The AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D Lens is a fav albeit it has a rather steep learning curve to achieve the potentials it is endowed with... But don't take my word here instead look at what I've done with it (below)

Food for thought, you might be wise to maybe ignore those who pontificate but fail to validate their claims with actual image artistry...

Hope this helps stevetassi...
All the best on your photographic journey...
.

AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D Lens
AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D Lens...

(Download)

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

stevetassi wrote:

I shoot with a Nikon d750 and I already own a sigma 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 24-120 f4 vr, and Tamron 70-200 f2.8 g2 lenses. I used to just shoot portraits, but now I’m finding myself shooting a little of everything. Should I invest in a 50mm lens or am I wasting money by purchasing one?

In my opinion a 50mm lens is great to have. I have a few and use 50mm quite often. To keep the cost down look at Nikon’s AF-D lenses they are sharp and will work on your D750. The AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D is listed on B&H for $131. The AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D is listed at $349. Either is a great choice.

stevetassi

SteveR wrote:

I had a 50 f1.8 before I ever had a 2.8. Just pla... (show quote)

When I had my d40, I had bought the 35mm f1.8 dx lens and never used the kit lens after that.

wingate2417 Loc: Quincy, Ca.

I use the fifty quite a lot. Sharp as a tack. I have the Nikon 50mm 1.8 g

stevetassi

wingate2417 wrote:

I use the fifty quite a lot. Sharp as a tack. I have the Nikon 50mm 1.8 g

Does it perform well wide open or do you usually stop it down a bit?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

For the Canon version, I can carry the f/1.8 lens in a pocket, particularly when shooting with another lens like the 16-35. Looks like the Nikon version is about the same small size and 6oz weight. Compared to other lenses, those 5-6oz feel like just shooting the body only. You'll have to decide for yourself if adding a prime to a zoom-only catalog enhances your photography or seems too limited.

CO

I have a D750 and I use the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 SP VC lens on it. That focal length produces a perspective that is close to what the human eye sees. It's great for environmental type portraits. I find that long focal lengths are not great for environmental type portraits because they have the effect of compressing distance and anything behind the model looks unnaturally large. The Tamron 45mm f/1.8 has a metal lens barrel, is fully weather sealed, and has vibration compensation.

Nikon D750 with Tamron 45mm f/1.8 SP VC lens

(Download)