Prime lens

[vyas -]

Hi all,

 

I just bought my first DSLR Nikon D80 and and a 18-70 mm lens....i am

considering buying the 50mm f1.8 prime lens.....is it s good buy?.....or should

i invest that money in some other lens??....can someone tell me the advantages

of this lens...one i know is the shallow DOf that i can get....

 

Vyas

[tim_knight]

You will learn a lot with this lens. With the aperture wide open (1.8) and higher ISO settings you can take some great indoor or night time street pictures without using the flash. This lens is very sharp and you will be awed by its tight portrait pictures. Remember the DOF and background blur is greater when the lens aperture is wide open and less when it is stopped down lets say at 5.6. For the money you will not regret owning this lens. The 50/1.8 lens is the cheap way to have a VR lens due to the higher shutter speeds you will be able to shoot with versus the shutter speed you would have to settle for when using the 18-70 lens.

[low light]

This lens is fantastic with the D80 but you should consider the Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX, this is the next lens on my shopping list. It should be a great walkaround lens and will be on my camera for 90% of the time.

[elliot1]

Your next lens should be puchased based on your shooting needs.

 

If you intend to shoot in low light conditions without flash, the 50mm 1.8 is probably the best value/lens Nikon offers. It is also an excellent portrait lens but you can get similar results with the lens you have now. Keep in mind you cannot go wrong with this lens, as it is so inexpensive and performs so well.

 

If you are going to be shooting sports or other activities where you are farther away than you would like to be from the subject matter, you will need a lens with a strong zoom. The 55-200mm or 70-300mm are good choices to start with.

 

You might want to consider an external flash, like the Nikon SB-600, if you are going to be shooting indoors a lot.

 

Have fun!

[Peter_in_PA]

I have a D50 with an 18-200, but I also have one of the 50 f1.8 lenses for the reasons

mentioned above. It is a FANTASTIC deal, for the price of a good Polarizing filter, you get a

lens that is among the sharpest and best ever made for Nikon!

 

It is a portrait length lens, GREAT for candids at a party, too...

[tom_jenner1]

It's probably the best deal in Nikon auto focus lenses. I don't think I've yet read a post where someone showed regret for buying this lens.

[ShunCheung]

Tom, there is certainly a first time for everything.

 

I bought my first Nikon camera 30 years ago. Before that, I used Minolta (film, of course) SLRs and like any other beginner at that time, I started with a 50mm lens, in my case an f1.4. I quickly realized that I did not like that focal length at all; it is not wide enough indoors and too short outdoors for portrait and landscape work. So in 30 years of shooting 9 different Nikon cameras, I have never owned a 50mm Nikon lens.

 

Admittedly, I must be in the minority and now with DSLRs, a 50mm becomes a short tele. The 50mm/f1.8 is certainly an inexpensive and high-quality lens. Whether that provides the angle of view for your taste will be up to you to decide.

 

Moreover, slow zoom such as the 55-200mm DX or 70-300mm would not be my choice for sports lenses. Those are both f5.6 on the long end, and AFAIK, the 55-200 has a slow AF motor inside.

[tom_jenner1]

Shun, you just had to pop my happy balloon :)

[ShunCheung]

We Chinese have a saying, the same type of rice raises a hundred different types of people. We all have our individual preferences. Perhaps 90% of photographers like to have a 50mm/f1.8 lens, but there are always exceptions.

 

However, I do have a couple of zooms that include 50mm in their ranges.

[marike1]

You will be duplicating the 50mm focal length that is included in your 18-70 DX, but

depending on what you want to shoot, the 50 1.8 is an excellent choice. As others have said,

it's sharp, fast, and being a prime lens, it has very little distortion.

 

On the D80, it becomes a 75 1.8 lens, making it a nice portrait lens. And as you mentioned,

the shallow DOF style of portraits are what make this lens so interesting to me. While the

18-70 is a good all-around lens, it is simply not capable of producing these types of images.<div></div>

[bwcombs]

Shun, in Texas, we have a saying:

 

The lamb and the mountain lion shall lay down together. But the lamb won't get much sleep.

 

Now if the lamb had had a 50mm f/1.8....

[james_martin9]

I think Shun raises a good point. I also do not own the 50mm lens because for what I shoot, I just dont find it has enough utility. However, it is a STEAL so there is no reason not to purchase one either. I will say this though, the 50mm 1.8 lens is one of the few lenses that almost everyone on this website and others praises whether they need or own one themselves. Someday I may purchase one, but I prefer mid-range zooms. I know primes are typically superior in their ability to render images, but I hate carrying a bag full of lenses, especially since I have at least one very heavy lens. That is why I love the 18-200 vr idea. It is a good average lens to use. ALsolk I am not comparing the two. The 50mm is around 100.00, the 18-200 if you can find it is anywhere from 800-1000.00. I say go get it and spend the reat of your money on a good dinner with the family to take photos of with your new lens.

[wj_lee]

All for a prime lens, makes you think when you take pictures. None better value than 50mm 1.8. However you might want a wider view for general purpose. Best thing to do is set your zoom at 50mm for few days and see how you find the view. If you like it then you can't go wrong buying 50mm 1.8.

[oliver_sun1]

The suggestion to put your zoom at 50 mm and try the perspective for a few days is a great idea, imo.

 

I recently tried the same thing after getting a D200 and finding all my focal lengths suddenly unfamiliar. For me the 50/1.8 was now too long for a walkaround lens, and my much-loved 24 had suddenly become a bit boring. Finally, I dug out my 35-80 "plastic fantastic" and put it at 35. Ahhh, relief! Here was something I could work with, the good-old 50 mm standard perspective!

 

Now only if it hadn't been stuck at a soft, distorted f/4.0... :)

[studor13]

I am also in the minority that doesn't own the 50mm f1.8, but it is on my NAS list. However, to say that the 18-70mm DX is not capable of taking decent portraits is simply not true.

 

In the shot below (jpg, Portrait Mode), I believe that anything faster than f4.5 would very likely have one of the girls out of focus. Even at f4.5 some of my shots had my daughter (left) out of focus when she was just a fraction more behind her cousin.

 

I took this shot because I saw the possibility of a good story. A good photo needs to tell some sort of story other than the fact that it has nice bokeh.<div></div>

[frank_skomial]

"I have a D50 with an 18-200, but I also have one of the 50 f1.8 lenses ... a lens that is among the sharpest and best ever made for Nikon!" - that is certainly a large collection of "I have" lenses to derive that statement.

[marike1]

"To say that the 18-70mm DX is not capable of taking decent portraits is simply not true."

 

I don't think I said the 18-70 is not "capable of taking decent portraits". I have the DX

lens, and think it's a very good performer. What I was commenting on was that slow,

variable aperture zooms (f/3.5-4.5) in general, are not as good as throwing the

background out-of-focus as a fast lens like the 50 1.8/1.4, 85 1.8/1.4, etc. I only

mentioned the 18-70 DX because that's what Vyas has and is familiar with.

 

Didn't mean to "diss" the kit lens. I was just stating a fact about fast lenses that, in

contrast to

the 18-70, are capable of extremely shallow DOF shots. The main reason that I'm about

to

buy the 17-55 2.8 is because I want a lens that can blur the background and that excels at

portraits. (I don't always want to whip out the 70-200 VR and would like the versatility of

a zoom, or I'd buy the 85 1.4, which is a dedicated portrait lens.)

[studor13]

Vyas, you have the 18-70mm and many people, including I, can tell you that it is a good lens. Everyone bar none tells you the 50mm f1.8 is a great lens. They are designed for different purposes and to please different people.

 

When you start comparing the 18-70mm DX with f2.8 lenses - or even faster ones - you are going off the track. It is a $350-ish lens. I would need a calculator to work out the cost of the 17-55, 70-200 and the 85mm lenses.

 

I shoot landscapes. I know what I need. What do you shoot? What do you NEED?

[djthomas]

Question about setting the 18-70 DX lens at 50... since the 50mm f/1.8 lens is NOT a DX lens, wouldn't the equivalent setting on a DX lens actually be 75mm and not 50mm?

[oliver_sun1]

The 18-70 set at 50 mm is exactly the same focal length as the 50/1.8. The DX lens designation only means that the lens image circle is only large enough to cover the DX sensor size.

[Peter_in_PA]

Frank,

 

I think you were quoting me...

 

I have worked with dozens of classic lenses and more modern lenses from Nikon, primes

and zooms, with Kodak DCS, Nikon F3, Nikon D1. The ones I mention are just the ones I

own myself, as I used to work (within the past two years...) in a shop where we had loads

of Nikon stuff and I didn't need to own anything. So I do know of what I speak. I worked

with the stuff every day.

 

Also, check this out.

 

http://www.photodo.com/product_41_p4.html

 

Photodo's MTF score: 4.4 - AMAZINGLY high! How many are higher? Very few... And that's,

I remind you, a one hundred dollar lens.

 

Extraordinarily good buy. Of course, now it's a portait lens, not a standard lens, with

DSLRs, but I like 70 - 80mm for portraits.

[ShunCheung]

David, focal lenght is independent of sensor size and format. A DX lens merely has a smaller image circle than a lens for 35mm film because the DX lens is designed to cover a smaller sensor. A 50mm DX lens and a 50mm film lens will give you the same image on a DSLR as far as image size is concerned (but the quality of the image may differ because of different optical design).