Suggested PRIME lens for d90 on street photography

<p>Hi. I' m interested in street photography. I usualy shoot film with a contax t2 ( 38 mm fixed lens). Now I shifted to digital, a Nikon D90 ( aps-c) and I' d need a good small wide prime, to have the 30-40 mm equivalent to 35mm on dx. So , I guess a lens between 20-28 could work well on dx. The question is : Nikon D90 is a great camera, producing very high IQ pics. And it needs a very good lens. I' ve heard about Nikon af 20 f2.8 : good reviews on film, mediocre reviews on dx format. Mediocre reviews also about Nikon af-d 24 2.8 and af-d 28 2.8 on dx format. It seems everybody claim that zoom lenses , made specificaly for dx format, are far superior than full frame nikon primes used on dx...I would be tempted to buy the Tamron 17-50 2.8, very good reviews and perfect lenght range for my street shots. But it's pretty big, at least compared to af 24 .28 and to af 20 2.8 too. I feel confortable on the streets using the most compact and unobstrusive kit as possible. On film era, primes = unobstrusive and best IQ. Now on dx digital, it seems that primes ( the wide ones) are : unobstrusive, but mediocre IQ. It hurts. I'm dreaming about a small wide prime for my D90, with about the same IQ as the great 38mm of my contax t2. Any suggestion ? Thank You, Marco.</p>

<p>28 2.8 AF works for me. I also have AiS 28 2.8 which is smaller and marginally better and has way less distortion. All the Nikon wides seem to have distortion and CA. I don`t think I will get more unless they get new ones for FX. Later zooms are better.</p>

<p>I suppose you know about the new 35 1.8 for DX. I suspect it will be very good when reviews are out.</p>

<p>Can I piggyback a question about the 85mm 1.4/1.8 on to this? I'm getting into street photography and I'm wanting to know if the 85mm makes a good lens for use with street photography, and if so, if the 85mm 1.4 is a cut above for use on the street.</p>

<p> The 20mm/2.8 Nikkor's worked well enough for David Alan Harvey to use on his Dx cameras, and many magazines to publish his pics. It may just be good enough for your use.</p>

<p>I know the work of David Allan Harvey, done with af 20 2.8, and I love it very much. This is the reason why I asked the forum's users for further information about that lens. I would know if a tarmon 17-50 2.8 @ 20mm would have significant higher IQ over nikkor af 20 2.8.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"...mediocre reviews..."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Be careful of such "reviews," which are often unqualified user opinion that, lacking context, may be irrelevant to your needs. And there are many technically flawed lenses that are still very useful for certain applications.</p>

<p>Street photography (assuming you're not literally talking about still photographic studies of a street, sidewalk, highway or pavement) seldom demands the sort of technical perfection associated with landscape, architectural, macro or formal portrait photography. The nitpicking about the 20/2.8 and 24/2.8 AF Nikkors is largely irrelevant to most casual, candid photography, where we're often lucky to get the main subject in sharp focus and without motion blur. I tried both in a local shop and saw no problems that would dissuade me from using one for street photography if I happened to need a moderately fast prime in that focal range. In this genre nobody is going to notice a bit of chromatic aberration, barrel distortion or coma.</p>

<p>But if you have doubts about those lenses and are already an experienced photography you may find some of the manual focus primes under the Zeiss and other badges better suited to your preferences.</p>

<p>Josh, regarding your question, sure, 85mm is a good focal length for street and casual candid photography, including documentary or travel. It's as handy for my DX format D2H as it was with my film Nikons. Sometimes it helps to get just a little reach or to isolate a subject amid cluttered surroundings. Mine is just the f/2 AI-S version, fast enough for most purposes but for available light use, faster is always better. Get the fastest version you can afford.</p>

<p>I agree with Lex. I have used the 20mm, 24mm and 28mm Nikkors on a D70 and D200 and D700. The 20mm f2.8 has soft corners wide open on the D700 but I will still use it stopped down. No problems with the others in either format.</p>

<p>I don' t care so much about the lenght difference between af 20 2.8 ( 30mm on dx) and af 24 2.8 ( 38mm on dx). There' s a little difference in size, the af 24 is so nicely small, but even, I don' t care that much, the 20 2.8 af would be right in size too. The most important issue making difference, for me, is IQ. Which one among the 2's will performe better on D90 quality-wise ?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The most important issue making difference, for me, is IQ</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As Lex said, this isn't going to be significant for street photography in any way.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The most important issue making difference, for me, is IQ.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No argument there. I feel that way every day.</p>

<p>Check out what Bjorn has to say: <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com">http://www.naturfotograf.com</a></p>

 

<p>I also know, as everyone does, Bjorn Roslett site. I found it very usefull, choosing my film kit lenses. As D90 could meter the light only with af lenses, it seems the best af wide would be the 20 2.8 af-d. I could choose this way : af 20 2.8 for street photography, lightweight and unconspicious, + tokina AI 17 3.5 for landscapes. That' s the reason why I asked how the tamron 17-50 2.8 will compare to 20 2.8 af, and by now, to tokina 17 3.5 too. I' m a prime fun, so, If the IQ of those 2 primes will equals the tamron 17-50 2.8, I would prefere the 2 primes. If not, I will sacrifice the small size of the primes in favour of the quality of the 17-50 2.8. Please, tell me your opinions. Thanks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Can I piggyback a question about the 85mm 1.4/1.8 on to this? I'm getting into street photography and I'm wanting to know if the 85mm makes a good lens for use with street photography, and if so, if the 85mm 1.4 is a cut above for use on the street.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>When I shoot on the street, I prefer a small, fast, medium tele and therefore use my 85mm f/1.8. Note that this is clearly not the same subject type as would be done with one of these wide angle lenses. If I don't have that lens on, I have my 18-70 on, mainly because I don't have a fast zoom between my 11-16 Tokina and my 70-200 Nikon. For me, doing what I like to do, those two are great about 70-80% of the time and the only thing I lack is speed in the shorter focal lengths once in a while. By speed I mean DoF control since I have no issue with boosting the ISO up to compensate - especially when shooting on the street.</p>

<p>I have bought a Sigma DC 17-70/2.8-4.5 Macro HSM lens on my D90, and I am very satisfied with its performance. There is almost no difference with my Nikkor AF 60mm/2.8D Micro at 60mm.</p>

<p>I've only used the Nikkor 17-55mm in that range, but I hear great things about the Tamron. I can't say how it holds up against the primes.</p>

<p>Voigtlander looks to be adding to their SL-II line for Nikon with the Color Skopar 20mm f/3.5. It's not out yet, but if it's anything like the 58mm Nokton it could be a winner. It looks very small, has a CPU for metering with any Nikon dSLR, and will almost definitely be cheaper than the Zeiss (21mm) alternative (which isn't out yet either). If you can deal with it being half a stop slower than your other options, this may be the lens for you.</p>

<p>It's due out at the end of the month, so I'd look for CameraQuest to have it: http://www.mapcamera.com/sho/search.php?MODE=M_VIEW&ACT=A_DETAIL&map_code=reserve0009172&class=01</p>

<p>Hope that helped.</p>

<p><a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00RzyX"><strong>Suggested wide prime on 450d for street photography</strong> </a><br>

<br /> <a href="../digital-camera-forum/00ReNt"><strong>I need help choosing my first dslr</strong> </a></p>

<p>Lex, I bought a d90....</p>

<p>John, that Color Skopar 20mm f/3.5 could be a wonderful solution ! Thanks !</p>

<p>Doesn't nikon have a new 35 f/1.8 AFS lens coming out for like $200? I think that would definately be worth checking out.</p>

<p>Unless you're like me, and you want a bit more working distance. Personally I prefer a 50mm or longer (looking at even a 105mm).</p>

<p>Keep in mind that e.g. the 24/2.8 is just so-so for general quality, it's actually pretty sweet in the close range. If you read reviews on the net, they will usually have the wide angle tested at large distances. In general though, the longer the focal length, the higher the image quality in a wide-angle, a notable exception being the Zeiss 21/2.8.<br>

But I do recommend picking a focal length first, there's a significant difference between 20 and 28, even on DX. If you'd aim for image quality you'd shoot large format anyway.</p>

<p>marco, the tamron 17-50 would be great for street photography. it basically offers 90-95% of the functionality of the nikkor 17-55 in a relatively small/lightweight package for 1/3rd of the cost. it's not as inobtrusive as the 50/1.8, but not much bigger than the sigma 30/1.4. also, it's optimized for digital so it would probably have more flare resistance and less CA than the older nikkor primes, though i have not compared them directly.</p>

<p>IMO if you're going to shoot with a prime for street, 2.8 is not fast enough to compensate for the loss of zoom flexibility. YMMV.</p>

<p>I use the Tamron 17-50 for street photography with my D200. I like having the wide end to give a feeling of space around my subjects. At night, when I have the need for speed, I use the Sigma 30 1.4.</p>

<p>you have pretty good inputs above. from my experience as a hobbyist, my tamron 17-50mm performs better than my 20mm. or maybe convenience of the zoom overshadowed the latter. when i still have the stamina and legs to walk the zoom, the 20mm served me well on the street with the 50mm f/1.8 in my pocket.<br>

i will suggest you get the tamron (for the size, image quality and convenience of the zoom) and the 35mm f/1.8 dx when it comes out. that will be a good pair on the street. mount one, the other in your pocket....for a prime person, if i go back to it, it will still be the 20mm mounted and the 35mm f/1.8 in my pocket. or vice versa.</p>

<p>I used to love the 20/2.8 AFD on DX format, though I used it back in the days of the D1h and not on higher-res cameras. Virtually all of my work done in Iraq was done with that single lens. Not that you can judge from web images, but you can see 'em at www.noahaddis.com.<br>

If you have the budget and don't mind a longer lens and manual focus, try the Zeiss 28/2. I use it as my main lens on the D700 now and it's amazing for street work and very easy to focus. They also make 25mm which could work well for you. I haven't used the 25mm but I've heard it's a great lens.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>For my new D90 I bought a Sigma DC 17-70/2.8-4.5 Macro HSM and I am very satisfied with it. Taken at 60mm there almost no difference with my Nikkor AF 60mm/2.8D Micro.</p>