Nifty Fifty...er, I mean "Super Seventy Five"?

Zillah

Doesn't have the same ring to it does it?

So I'm gonna buy a new lens or two, and one thing I lack is a good super sharp prime lens. So I think to myself "About time I got a nifty fifty for meself Zillah". But, after thinking about it for a while I realised that I am using a DX sensor, which means that a nifty fifty that isn't optimised is actually subject to the 1.5 factor, making it 75mm.

So, when I hear people (you people) talking about their super sharp day-to-day nifty 50mm lenses, how many of you are using APS-c sized sensors (most I'd imagine), and do you not find that 75mm is a bit too much of a telephoto for comfortable day-to-day shooting?

I suppose a DX tailored 50mm or a regular 30mm/35mm might be preferable? I quite like a lot of room when I'm framing.

Borderfox

Sigma 30mm f1.4 is your man, 50mm on full frame works really nice whereas on crop (even 1.3) seems a bit tight

pete4130

If your Nikon the 35mm 1.8 is really good but won't work on full frame. If you want to spend the same amount of money you could get a 2nd hand 35mm f/2 lens that will work on both formats. My money would be on the 35mm f/2. I want one but can't justify it at the minute.

charybdis

Zillah wrote: »

But, after thinking about it for a while I realised that I am using a DX sensor, which means that a nifty fifty that isn't optimised is actually subject to the 1.5 factor, making it 75mm.

A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens no matter what format you use it with. When used with an APS-C sensor, it has an angle-of-view equivalent to a roughly 75mm lens on a 135 film sized sensor.

Zillah wrote: »

So, when I hear people (you people) talking about their super sharp day-to-day nifty 50mm lenses, how many of you are using APS-c sized sensors (most I'd imagine)

I'm fairly sure the vast majority of "nifty fifty" users have APS-C cameras. It's a popular lens because it's cheap, not because its focal length is magical.

Zillah wrote: »

I suppose a DX tailored 50mm or a regular 30mm/35mm might be preferable? I quite like a lot of room when I'm framing.

Unfortunately, because of the registration distance of most DSLRs (due to the 35mm film legacy), wide angle or even normal primes require more complicated optics than they would if the cameras were created from scratch with the APS-C format in mind. As such, there aren't a lot of options for short prime lenses.

On 35mm film cameras, a lens of focal length in the 35mm - 50mm region would be considered a normal lens, depending on how you define "normal". On APS-C cameras, this roughly translates to lenses in the 20mm - 35mm range.

Since you're using the "DX" term, I assume you're using a Nikon DSLR. I suggest you get the aforementioned 35mm f/1.8.

GhostInTheRuins

Yeah if you're looking for a walk about lens with a "normal" field of view on dx, get the 35mm f2. It's about two-three times the price of the 50mm f1.8 though. (Unless of course you never ever plan on going FX or using it for film, in which case I suppose get the 35mm f1.8, it's cheaper but is digital format only)

50mm f1.8, while a fantastic lens for the money, honestly isn't a great walk about lens on DX format, it's just too long. It's great on film/fx though.

Cook my sock

you should consider a tamron 17-50 F/2.8 as a walkabout lens. currently eyeing it up myself!

Hugh_C

I think there's a 24-85 on adverts at the mo (not mine I hasten to add) which is a fine walkaround lens on an APS-C camera - I've been using one for a few years. Not a sharp prime mind you but it covers a multiple of sins. Depends what your needs are I suppose.

PopeBuckfastXVI

May be relevant, I wrote this just this week:

http://hughwphamill.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/chicago-and-a-love-affair-with-a-50mm/

I'm on Nikon DX and if you're in Galway I'll happily arrange a meetup sometime for you to try out the 50, maybe at the next photowalk or something.

magicbastarder

i'll add a recommendation for the 35mm f1.8 if it's a nikon you have.
the 50mm f1.8 (on DX) i find annoying - a bit too long for general use, a bit too short for telephoto use.

Hugh_C

magicbastarder wrote: »

the 50mm f1.8 (on DX) i find annoying - a bit too long for general use, a bit too short for telephoto use.

pretty good for portraits though

magicbastarder

i've always enjoyed using a 50mm for that; i do have a gorgeous 90mm f2 OM zuiko, which i have taken some nice portraits on, but i do like getting in closer.

TinyExplosions

I have a 35mm 1.8 and a 50mm 1.8, and I prefer the 35 -the 50 is just a little too 'long' to make it that perfect walk around lens, whereas the 35 is sweet as can be!

magicbastarder

also, bear in mind that the 50mm f1.8 has full functionality on all nikon DSLRs in terms of compatibility with sensor size, and the 35mm f1.8 has full functionality on all nikon DSLRs in terms of autofocus - but they're each lacking what the other boasts, if you follow me.

Zxc

If you happen to be thinking of buying your new lenses in the UK, remember the VAT goes up in January, the 4th, I think, from 17.5% to 20%.

greener greene

I personally prefer a 24mm F2.8 (on both 35mm film and my smaller digital sensor), as I find the 50mm too tight. Worth trying in my opinion.

Thecageyone

Cook my sock wrote: »

you should consider a tamron 17-50 F/2.8 as a walkabout lens. currently eyeing it up myself!

Go for it, great lens. Really feels like a massive leap up from a kit-lens. I bought a used one a few months back and I think I've only used my 50mm f/1.8 twice since! I find it just as sharp at 50mm [Though I process every shot either way] and it's nice to have the wide end of it too for general walk about. Ok, you're missing the wider aperture, but I bet most people with a 'nifty' rarely use f/1.8. Even the 50mm's sweetest spot will be around f/8.

gsxr1

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/28mm-f18.htm

what about this instead of the sigma. What does the 28mm end up as on a rebel .

Heebie

Hey.. I have one of these. (It's a nice lens.)

Borderfox wrote: »

Sigma 30mm f1.4 is your man, 50mm on full frame works really nice whereas on crop (even 1.3) seems a bit tight

Borderfox

All my primes get used mostly wide open thats the beauty of them, I shot a horse show last night at 1/400th f1.2 ISO 6400. I would still have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 if i had a 1.6 crop camera, cracker of a lens

magicbastarder

i have one for sale, but unfortunately it's the wrong mount for the OP.

Heebie

f1.2? That must have been a pricey piece of glass when it was new! =O Holy cripes on toast!

I do like my "purty thirty" so far. (I think I said it earlier..but I thought up the phrase "purty thirty" & needed an excuse to see how many people poo poo it!)

Borderfox wrote: »

All my primes get used mostly wide open thats the beauty of them, I shot a horse show last night at 1/400th f1.2 ISO 6400. I would still have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 if i had a 1.6 crop camera, cracker of a lens