Using the Nikon AF-S 35mm DX f1.8G Lens on DX and FX DSLR?

<p>Hi<br>

I currently use a Nikon D60 which has the smaller APS-C sensor and is DX format. There is a possibility I will be upgrading to a full frame camera in the future but for now, I would like to continue using the D60. I'm looking at adding a prime lens for portraits to my kit, and would like to use this on future full frame cameras. This issue here is finding a lens suitable for both.</p>

<p>I like the look of the Nikon AF-S 35mm DX f.1.8G lens and also the Nikon AF-S 50mm f.1.8G lens and am trying to decide which to purchase. Am I right in thinking that the 35mm is designed for DX (small sensor) cameras? and the 50mm for FX cameras? </p>

<p>There a few questions I have regarding the lenses and I would be very grateful if you could offer any advice or experience you have.</p>

<p>1. How do I know what the crop factor will be on each of these? Presumably if the 35mm is DX format it won't crop as it is designed for DX cameras and will stay at 35mm?<br>

2. Does the cropping have an effect on the minimum distance at which the lens will focus?<br>

3. I know the DX will only use part of the sensor on an FX camera and so image quality will be reduced slightly, but how much does this actually effect the overall quality?<br>

4. If I use the 50mm on a DX, the spec says the lens will be 75mm. Is this too much for standard portraits?<br>

5. Any experiences with using these lenses on a DX camera and then an FX?</p>

<p>I bought this lens when I had my D7000. I tested all my D3 and it was actually reasonably good - the corners are a bit weak and of course there was some vignetting but the image area does cover then entire frame. I decided at that time sell it and get the 35mm f2 which is a bona fide full frame lens and would also work on DX. If you plan on going to FX, I suggest a FX lens.</p>

<p>The focal length of a lens does not magically change when you put it on a DX camera, only the field of view changes. A 50mm lens will be a 50mm lens on DX but will have the same field of view as a 75mm lens.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>..would like to use this on future full frame cameras. This issue here is finding a lens suitable for both.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>To be blunt, forget about maybe going to a FF camera some day in the future, maybe. Do not let that drive your decision today, because you will sell yourself short that way. Why compromise today for something that maybe might happen some day in the future?<br>

With that default warning out of the way....<br>

Start with using your kitlens to define whether you want a 35mm or 50mm lens. They simply do not look the same; some people strongly prefer one specific focal length over the other - you really can only decide that for yourself (personally, I am no fan of 50mm on APS-C cameras, it's in the middle of nowhere).</p>

 

<ol>

<li>35mm f/1.8DX is designed for DX only, the 50mm f/1.8G will work on both DX and FX.</li>

<li>Crop factor does not depend on the lens ever. It only depends on the body it is used on. So the crop factor is always the same if you use it on your D60.</li>

<li>Image quality will not be reduced, if you use a DX lens on FX camera, by default it will reduce the resolution to match the DX coverage of the sensor - in other words, it applies the crop factor.</li>

<li>The specs do not say that; it says the angle of view of a 50mm lens used on DX will resemble a 75mm lens on FX. Standard portraits taken on FX are frequently made using a 85mm lens (with some prefering longer, up to 135mm is quite normal). So if anything, 75mm is still too short.</li>

<li>Yes. The 35mm f/1.8DX is a great lens in each and every way and about the most useful prime I know for a DX camera. I sold it - at €25 loss - when I moved to FX; the 50mm f/1.8 I never really liked on DX as said before, on FX it's one of my standard go-to lenses.</li>

</ol>

<p>If you really insist on a FX capable lens now, I would recommend also looking at the 85mm f/1.8G. Some will argue it's too long for DX.... I happen to think this length is really fine on DX, and FX as well.</p>

<p>1. The "crop factor" effect is the same regardless of whether a lens is DX or FX. A 35mm lens on a DX camera will give you the same field of view as a 52.5mm lens on an FX camera. The difference between DX and FX lenses is the image circle they create. See #3 below<br>

<br /> 2. No.<br>

<br /> 3. A DX lens, designed for a smaller sensor, creates a smaller image circle than an FX lens. If you use a DX lens on an FX camera, the effect might only be darker and less sharp corners, or the corners could be completely dark. However, as Wouter pointed out, FX Nikons detect a DX lens and only give you a cropped image. It is possible to override this behavior.<br>

<br /> 4. As Elliot said above, a lens will have the same focal length no matter where you put it. If you use a 50mm lens on a DX body, you will get the same field of view as if you had used a 75mm lens on an FX body. Many photographers would consider that a good field of view for portraits, but that depends on your preferences and how much room you have to shoot.</p>

<p>1. Forget about "crop factors". Period. Presumably you have a zoom lens that came with your D60? Set the zoom to 35mm, then to 50mm. That is how a 35mm or 50mm prime lens will look on your D60. Any 35mm or 50mm lens. Doesn't matter if it's DX or FX, the field of view of the lens will be the same as the equivalent focal length setting on your zoom.</p>

<p>2. No.</p>

<p>4. See 1. above.</p>

<p><em>"... issue here is finding a lens suitable for both."</em></p>

<p>The problem with finding a single lens for both is that the field of view of a single lens will be different for both. I suggest you buy the lens that best suits the camera you have now (DX). In future *if* you upgrade to FX, you can always sell or trade-in if you later find it is not as useful on FX format.</p>

<p>What others have said, plus from my own experience a 35/1.8 DX would be a sweet lens on your current D60. I've used mine on a D5000 (successor to D60) and now D5100. It's fast, sharp, and contrasty. Just a little distorted and shows chromatic aberrations at some aperture settings (both of these slight defects are automatically corrected in jpeg, or Nikon's raw converters.)</p>

<p>The 35mm DX lens is a heck of a good lens. The DX vs. FX thing is confusing - if a DX camera (like your D60) is your first SLR then forget about calculating equivalents with the crop factor and just consider what the focal length does on your camera. Do you have an 18-55 lens? Put it at 35mm and you'll see the field of view that a 35mm prime lens has, and set it at 50mm to see what a 50mm prime lens would be like.</p>

<p>The crop factor calculations are for people who are used to shooting 35mm film cameras. If that's you, you can use the crop factor to see what lens on your DX camera substitutes for a particular lens on your film camera. Multiply the focal length by 1.5 to get the equivalent. (This is true whether the lens is marked DX or FX.) So the 35mm on the DX camera roughly substitutes for a normal 50mm lens on a film camera. The 50mm on the DX camera substitutes for a 75mm lens on a film camera, etc. But if you're not used to film shooting, none of this stuff about equivalents and substitution is useful and you can ignore it.</p>

<p>It's a great lens on DX!</p>

<p>Ignore anybody who tells you that it is okay in a pinch on FX. It is not. The corners are seriously darkened (especially stopped down) and the image quality in the corners will be junky. It's not an FX lens and shouldn't be used that way.</p>

<p>Buy it, love it, and if/when you move on, sell it with your DX rig and move on.</p>

<p><em>Standard portraits taken on FX are frequently made using a 85mm lens (with some prefering longer, up to 135mm is quite normal). So if anything, 75mm is still too short.</em><br>

<em><br /></em>The difference between 75mm and 85mm doesn't add up to a hill of beans. On DX, a 50mm is a fine portrait lens.</p>