low F-stop lenses Nikon

<p>I've been using a DSLR for a while, but learned on an old fully manual film camera. My lenses in the past have not gone down in F-stop past 3.5. I would really like something in the 1.8 range. What lenses would you recommend and if I did get one that had that F-stop what is the focal distance be for that lens? Also I'm going to upgrade to a Nikon D7000. Thanks everyone!</p>

<p>35mm 1.8g ~$225</p>

<p>50mm F/1.8G.<br>

My Personal favorite is the 85mm. The F/1.8D is very good I hear the F/1.8G is even better.</p>

<p>Type of shots on a D7000 with...<br /> 35mm f/1.8, equal to 52mm or "normal" view, for group shots, street activity, travel<br /> 50mm f/1.8, equal to 75mm "semi-telephoto", medium portrait of one or two people, isolating a subject<br /> 85mm f/1.8 equal to 127mm "medium telephoto", headshot portrait, isolating a subject even more<br>

These are only general descriptions, you can use any of these lenses any way you like. And with 1.8 and the very good high ISO, very low light will also be possible.</p>

<p>If you're interested in an 85mm, the discussion <a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00T1Bs"><strong>in this thread</strong></a> discusses the f/1.8D and the f/1.4D. Some of the things that have been criticized about the 85mm f/1.8D (harsh out of focus highlights) are said to have been corrected in the 85mm f/1.8G, which has gotten excellent reviews. These days, I use an f/1.4D, which I bought used, and like it very much.</p>

<p>Marissa - <i>why</i> do you want a faster lens? If you want something you can hand-hold in the dark, wider lenses are easier (suggesting the 28 or 35mm would be a good starting point - the 24mm is silly money, and the Sigma 20mm is optically iffy; if you could put up with manual focus, the 35mm f/1.4 Samyang gets good reviews too and is cheap) - but bear in mind that these lenses aren't image stabilized. If you want to lose the background, longer is usually better, and if the 85 is within your budget then it's a good choice - the 50mm or something like a Tamron 60mm f/2 would also be good.<br />

<br />

It's more usual to pick the field of view (focal length) that you want first, then worry about the aperture. Interesting that you're starting at the other end; I'm just curious why. Did you ever use anything faster on your film camera?<br />

<br />

Incidentally, I'm assuming when you say "focal distance" you mean "focal length" (of the lens), not "close focus distance" (how close you can get to something in focus). If the latter is a concern, the 60mm f/2 mentioned above is a macro lens. There are several longer f/2 lenses that will lose the background as well or better than the 85mm f/1.8, but generally the price goes up the farther (each way) you get from 50mm.<br />

<br />

I hope that helps. If you tell us a bit more, we might be able to give some more advice.</p>

<p>On a D7000, I'd much prefer the 35 f/1.8 over a 50mm myself (I find the 75mm equivalent is either too short, or too long, but never quite right).However, that's just my preference.<br>

You can determine for yourself which focal length suits you best, by using your zoomlens at those lenghts, and when you know which focal length you prefer yourself, you'll know which fast lens to get.</p>

<p>For general photography with an APS size sensor, definitely the 35mm/1.8. I love using mine in a variety of situations, low light <em>or</em> bright light.</p><div></div>

<p>35mm was not too wide for me so I opted with the 28mm 1.8G for $699. The 28 1.8G is a much better designed lens optically compared to the 35 1.8G and it is all worth spending the extra $$$.</p>

<p>It's hard to answer your question because you didn't tell us how you intend to use the lens or for what. FWIW, the only lens of that type that I own is a Sigma 30mm f1.4. It's an excellent lens and the f1.4 is faster than the f1.8. It would be perfect on a D7000 and is a better lens than the Nikon f1.8 models.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>The biggest bargains are the versions of the 50mm f/1.8 that will work on your camera (<a href="http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html">check</a>, mostly an accurate list).<br>

Look on Nikon's web site for the lower priced primes, they are all excellent lenses, and if you buy a used one the prices can be very good.</p>

<p>Some of the third-party makers produce worthy, fast lenses -- they survive partly by providing alternatives that Nikon doesn't make.</p>

<p>Hi Marrissa,<br>

Just some questions to your question if you do not mind...<br>

- How wide or long do you want a lens to be ? ( closer to 20mm or closer to 180mm..)<br>

- How much do you want to spend ? ( cheper lens : 35mm 1.8g, a bit wider with nanocoating, and much more xpensive the new AF-s 28mm 1.8 G, etc. etc.) -<br>

- What do you want to take pictures of ?<br>

- Do you need a fast lens for low light or for Bokeh ?</p>

<p>The lenses mentioned. Also the 50 1.4 the newer one is more expensive both work well.</p>

<p>Just FYI Marissa, we usually talk of apertures <em>increasing</em> as the number gets smaller, since the actual opening of the lens gets bigger in diameter. So a lens with a small aperture number has a larger aperture than one with a bigger number.<br /> To go from f/3.5 to f/1.8 would be to go <strong>up</strong> in aperture rather than down. Confusing, I know, but that's the way it is.</p>

<p>BTW, largest aperture lens you can get in a Nikkor is the 50mm f/1.2 manual focus. A bit misty wide open, but gives an effect you can't get with other lenses. Used price seems to be around $500, which is still less than the new price of any current f/1.4 Nikkor.</p>

<p>RJ - at least, we talk about "stopping down" when moving to a smaller aperture, as an alternative to "opening up" the aperture. I'm not sure I tend to think of them in directional terms, but since Marissa presumably doesn't want to go to f/64, hopefully we knew what she meant.<br />

<br />

The terminology I try to drum into people is that, because the "f" in the f-stop stands for focal length, the aperture size is a fraction. Hence f/2 is bigger than f/4, just as ½ is bigger than ¼. It's why I grumble when I see "f2" (which, technically, is f/0.5).<br />

<br />

Marissa: Are you still there? I think a few of us would like to know if you've any thoughts on what you want the lens for. We could probably comment on <i>which</i> lens might be appropriate at the focal length you want, for example?<br />

<br />

(The problem with a public forum is that you never know when someone who asks a question has stopped checking for answers.)</p>