Just Dawn Loc: North Carolina

I have a nikon dx format and want to buy a good, fast lens for portraiture. I've heard that the 85mm f/1.8 is the way to go. My question is, since I'm shooting on a dx format camera should I get a 50mm or something similar since I'll need to multiply the range by 1.5? Or will the 85mm f/1.8 still be the best option? Also, the lens I'm interested in is made for fx format but the description says it will work fine on dx format as well. Any feedback would be much appreciated as I'm pretty new to this forum as well as photography in general. Thank you.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

85mm f/1.8

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

50mm is a better choice overall with your camera. The 85mm will often cause to to get too far back from your subject.

JPL

Since your sensor is smaller than full frame you would do well with 50 mm, but 85 is also perfectly good, the main difference you will have to back off a bit more from your subject and there fore need more space if you are planing studio portraits.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

A 50, 55 or 60mm lens would be a better choice for portraits with your DX camera. The 85mm would be like shooting a 128mm lens on a FX camera. Nothing really wrong with that, lots of portrait photographers use lenses longer than the standard 80 - 105mm range. If you have a zoom lens that goes out to 85mm you should try that out on portraits to see how far back you will have to be with an 85mm. Some portraitists like to be up close and some like to be further back. Some swear by the 70 - 200 f2.8.

Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago

My nephew has the 50mm1.8G on a D3300 and gets great, clear, crisp results.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

In my opinion a 50mm lens is far more useful on a DX camera.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

I am partial to getting FX lenses for my DX cameras. I'm glad I decided to do this in the beginning when I started with DX format as I have now also included FX format and all those lenses work. I believe FX lenses perform better on DX cameras than most dedicated DX lenses.

A good, fast 50mm FX may be a better choice, as it will work more like a 75mm on DX.

So, yes, IMHO, FX is a better choice, with more options/choices for DX, especially if you feel that there is "any" chance of going FX in the future.

Ctrclckws

The 85mm f1.8 as a field of view equivalent to 127.5mm when used on a DX camera. This is close to the other end of the typical portrait focal length.

So here's how I think of it.

At the same distance, camera to subject:
135mm FX - 85mm DX (127.5mm FOV eq) = head shot.
85mm FX - 50 mm DX (75mm FOV eq)= head and shoulders
50mm FX - 35 mm DX (52.5mm FOV eq)= Head and torso.

CO

Also consider the Nikon 40mm f/2.8 DX micro lens. It's a macro lens but is great for general photography and being a macro lens will autofocus in situations when you want to get close to your subject. It's very sharp, has almost zero distortion, and very good bokeh. I've had one for about a year and have been impressed with it.

Ken Rockwell did a good review of it here:
http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/40mm-f28.htm

bruswen Loc: Eugene OR

The short answer is, on a dx body, a 50mm f/1.8 is a very versatile lens and gives you the most bang for the buck. Having said that, if you have been working with a zoom on a dx body and have shot some portraits that please you, check the focal length you were shooting at, this would be a good indicator of what works for you in terms of working distance and perspective.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Do not buy a fixed focal length until you know what you need!

If you buy either an 85mm f/1.8 or a 50mm f/1.8 you'll be happy with it, and because of that for quite some time think you made the right decision. The fact is there are several other focal lengths that would also seem "perfect" if they are the only one you have.

For example, we commonly hear that 85mm is great for portraits using a FF sensor. What you don't hear is that is true for studio portraits, and isn't valid for much of anything else. Do you intend on doing studio portraiture?

In other places many who shoot "people pictures" like a longer focal length. The 135mm focal length for several decades was pretty much the standard "second lens". But it is also true that a vast number of people photographers prefer up to 200mm or even longer! And at the other end of the stick you'll find Street Photographers who want 35mm or even 28mm lenses.

It all depends on the photographer, not on other photographers, but on you.

I would highly suggest you wait before buying a fast fixed focal length lens. Before you do that, purchase a zoom lens. If you have a liking for wider angle focal lengths to get a broader picture, go for something like an 18-70mm. If longer reach has an appeal, look for a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (the older one), or if you have a D7xxx body look for an 80-200mm f/2.8. Or for in between try a 24-120mm f/4.

Any of those lenses will continue to be useful for general photography, but the immediate need is to learn about what is actually useful to you. Then pick the specialty tool for your specific needs.

jgitomer Loc: Skippack Pennsylvania

In theory an fx lens on a dx camera should yield a sharper image than a dx lens on the same camera. This is because, except for very expensive lenses, the greater the distance from the center of the image the less sharp that part of the image.

Since fx lenses are designed to cover a larger area there should be less image degradation at the corners.

ABJanes Loc: Jersey Boy now Virginia

I enjoy using my AF-S 50MM f1.8 G on my Nikon D7100. It takes some practice! I found this iPhone App "Simple Depth of Field" very helpful. I frequently use my lens at f2.8 where is tends to be sharper, ISO 1000-1600 and I stand back 8-10' enlarging in PP. It all depends on how shallow you want your DoF. You have to keep your shutter speed up and beware of bright background lighting. I love it for candids of our grandchildren. I'm a two year newbie to all of this.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

Spot on as always.
Most photographers would say that for a head-and-shoulders portrait, somewhere between 70 and 100mm is best (or the equivalent for a crop sensor). Shorter makes the nose look big, longer makes the ears look big and a bit odd.
If you insist on going prime now, bear in mind that if the lens is a bit too wide, you can crop. If it's a bit too long, you lose the shot. My preference would be for the 50mm. Cheap too.