stavros Loc: East Tennessee

I want to buy one of these new lenses. I shoot with a Nikon D600 and currently have the Tamron 28-300 zoom, a Tokina macro and a Tokina super wide angle zoom. Most of my photography is taken while hiking in the mountains of east Tennessee and North Carolina and of the grandkids and family at family events. I also enjoy close ups of flowers and butterflies. This will be my first purchase of a prime lens. The reviews on both are quite positive. Which would you recommend?

john boots

Try the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 G less expensive and has great reviews ,I just bought one to use on a D600

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Not a great deal of difference in field of view. Here is what to do - set your Tamron on 35 mm and do some shooting then set it on 45 mm and do some shooting and see which one you like best. While you are at it you may want to try 50 mm and see how you like it too. - Dave

stavros Loc: East Tennessee

Thanks. I'll check it out

stavros Loc: East Tennessee

Great idea. Now why didn't I think of that!

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Both are amazing lenses. The focal lengths are very close so owning both would benefit few. I have put both in my rental inventory and bought the 35mm for personal use. Their real forte is in low light shooting where tripods and flash is not allowed, like museums and art galleries. Their stabilization is amazingly good, and it the real advantage to these lenses over comparable glass.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The reviews of these two lenses have been full of praise. Given the outstanding build quality and optional quality, and the very reasonable price, these lenses will set a new standard. While some more expense 35s and 50s might better them in certain areas, when you consider what you're getting at the price they appear to be significant bargains. I'm not in the market for one myself because I have a Canon 35mm f/2 IS which is a very fine lens in its own right. If I was buying today, and wanted a 35mm with stabilization I would possibly go for the Tamron. The Canon 35 f/2 IS is very sharp, and much smaller and lighter than the Tamron. It's only a 1/3 stop slower and costs around the same amount. The Tamron is a sealed lens with a much better build, a five year warranty, and a 1/3 stop wider aperture at the same price as the Canon. I think the main differentiator for me would be AF speed, and even more importantly, AF accuracy and consistency As is well known AF on the highly respected Sigma primes can be dicey at times, and often inconsistent on different Canon bodies. If Tamron can achieve more consistent AF, these will be real winners.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

In your case none. I do not know the speed of your present lenses but for hiking you do not need expensive, large aperture lenses. For ambient light portraits you do not need fast lenses either unless you like to shoot wide open at f1.8 or f2.8. Your macro lens is very capable of very good portraits.
Never buy a camera or a lens because of the "positive" reviews but always buy what you actually need for your photography.
You said that you "want to buy" one of the two lenses and that tells me that the chances are excellent that you will buy anyway regardless of advise.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Because I can, and because I want to, I have purchased a lot of gear that I didn't "need". Owning good photography gear is something that I enjoy, regardless of actUal "need".

icemncmth Loc: Oklahoma

I have the 35mm and it is on my D7200 pretty much all the time. It really is a well built lens, takes great pics, has great weather protections, fast etc. It is a big lense and it is heavy. This pic was taken with the lense.

stavros Loc: East Tennessee

My interest in these two lenses is based on a lot of comments on this forum that the 35MM and 50MM are popular options for a general all purpose walk around lens and a desire to become more acclimated to the use of prime lenses. I can't tell you how many purchases I haven't made after thinking through the "need" vs "want" debate. I may back off from this one too. I do appreciate your thoughtful response though. It gives me pause to think.

ballsafire Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana

Just buy the Canon lens for Nikon camera 50mm 1.8 Nikon lens -- it is a lot more economical and suitable for your needs - end of story.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Nothing wrong with it but in my particular case I only buy gear when I know it will improve my photography over what I presently own and that means when I need it.
I have this nasty tendency of not burning money just for the sake of it.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

The main difference beside focal length is that the Tammies have whatever they call their version of VR.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

?!?!?!?