35 or 50mm? Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

orrie smith Loc: Kansas

Wingpilot wrote:

Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

the 35mm would appear as a 50mm on a cropped sensor. depends on what you are shooting, landscape and portraits, the 35mm, street photography the 50mm

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Wingpilot wrote:

Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

Opinions will differ, but on crop 35mm will probably be more useful for a wider range of subjects. If you are planning a significant number of close up portraits however, the 50mm (75mm equivalent angle of view on a Nikon crop) will be a better choice. A wider angle lens like a 35mm will distort facial features in close up images. These days I mostly use primes for my Canon 7D Mark II, mainly for the faster apertures and the fun of being forced to consider composition more carefully than with zooms. . My primary walk around lens is a 35mm f/2. I augment it with a 50mm f/1.8. On a Canon crop sensor, the 35mm equivalent angle of view for these two lenses is 56mm and 80mm, respectively.

dickwilber Loc: Indiana (currently)

The usual determination for a "normal lens" focal length is the diagonal of of the format dimensions. For a 35 mm film or "full frame" camera this works out to be 43 mm, but most SLR's initially were provided with 50 mm lens which allowed for the mirror to flip up out of the way. (Wider angle lenses are "retrofocus" to provide the desired angle of view while providing that mirror clearance.) Over the years 50 mm became the defacto "normal lens" for 35 mm film. With today's "crop" sensors, that diagonal is around 28 mm, while most photographers consider 35 mm the defacto norm. But, in fact, it depends on the photographer, and what feels right to them. (I like something around 90 - 105 mm on full frame, but that's the way I "see" things.)

Kuzano

orrie smith wrote:

the 35mm would appear as a 50mm on a cropped sensor. depends on what you are shooting, landscape and portraits, the 35mm, street photography the 50mm

The 50 would just fall into the range of a portrait lens (70mm) on the DX sensor. Short telephoto AOV is suggested to avoid "dog nose" portraits, or compress facial features just a bit.

The 35 would fall into the range of a normal AOV for the sensor in a DX. (or, NOT really wide angle)

So what are you looking for in effective focal lenth... many people are after wider angle for landscape, which you would not hit until you get to 14-18 in digital glass on a DX sensor.

Even that is controversial territory, a the use of wide angle for landscape is a different type of discussion. No givens here.

tomglass Loc: Yorktown, VA

I have the 35mm f1.8 nikon that I use on my D7200. I have used it much more than I thought I would. I was originally planning to also buy a 50mm, but haven't felt the need. I'd recommend the 35mm.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

orrie smith wrote:

the 35mm would appear as a 50mm on a cropped sensor. depends on what you are shooting, landscape and portraits, the 35mm, street photography the 50mm

Traditionally, street photographers used 35mm lenses, even when 50mm was "standard", because they wanted to be up-close-and-personal; doesn't using a 50mm lens with a crop sensor camera almost give you the perspective of a voyeur, observing from a distance, when doing street photography??

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Seems like a tough choice, not a simple as I thought it might be. i would probably by using the lens more for landscape/scenery shots than for portrait photography. In that case, the 35 looks better. But for a truly wider view, I might have to investigate something wider, such as an 18 or 24mm prime. I guess my point is, ultimately, that for carrying around what is already a fairly heavy, a light lens is a good idea, whereas something like an 16-300 would really add to the overall weight.

Sheesh! Back in my film days when I had my Pentax Spotmatic, I had the 49mm f/1.4 prime, a 135 prime and a 300 prime. For macro and other close ups I had a bellows unit and a set of extension tubes. Life was much simpler back then. So today, I have a limited amount of funds to dedicate to the photography gear, so after the camera purchase, I need to be certain that what I get for lenses is what I really need. I appreciate the collective knowledge here, as I am learning a lot just by reading and asking. Thank you.

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

It all depends on how YOU see things. I like a longer lens so that i can have my focus limited to a smaller field of view. Others like a broader view. AS an aside if you want the lens for portraits the 35 mm will distort to make noses look big on head shots. To find out which one would work the best for you set your zoom an 50 mm and take some shots then do the same with your zoom set at 35 mm and pick the one that works best for you. - Dave

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Wingpilot wrote:

Seems like a tough choice, not a simple as I thoug... (show quote)

You will not regret the purchase of the 35mm 1.8 DX.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

wilsondl2 wrote:

It all depends on how YOU see things. I like a longer lens so that i can have my focus limited to a smaller field of view. Others like a broader view. AS an aside if you want the lens for portraits the 35 mm will distort to make noses look big on head shots. To find out which one would work the best for you set your zoom an 50 mm and take some shots then do the same with your zoom set at 35 mm and pick the one that works best for you. - Dave

Good advice. Thanks.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Wingpilot wrote:

Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

This debate will never end. I solved it by buying both the 35mm and 50mm 1.8. If you settle for just the 50mm only, get the premier one. Cost more. The 50mm is suppose to see what your real eyes see. You could go 35mm and 85mm. You can get a 2 lens Nikon set at B&H for $500.00. A bargain to me. You can get by without the 50mm if you buy that pair. The nifty fifty was on my film DSLR. And was my main
manual lens for years.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I like the idea of being wider and cropping if necessary - generally ......

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Wingpilot wrote:

Any recommendations regarding either the 35 or 50mm primes on a D7200, to use on general photography? I just wonder if the 35mm would be a better prime on a D7200?

It really is a personal decision based on your shooting habits. There's no such thing as "general" when it comes to field of view and your subjects.

Basically it comes down to shooting with one or the other for a week or two and seeing how you feel about it.

I have a 50mm and a 35mm and both are good but for me, the 35mm edged the 50mm out because of what I like to shoot and how close I like to get and what I like to include in the frame.

It's very specific to a person's shooting M.O.

I'd buy both lenses from B&H or Adorama and then shoot for a couple of days each.

At the end of that time, if the lens' are in pristine shape and you have all of the necessary paperwork and packing, then send one back.

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

Definitely; 35mm caters for those times when you need a little more room in the framing.