the usefulness of 50mm lens on crop body

jamiebonline

jamiebonline

Suspended / Banned
Messages
194
Name
Jamie
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

Hope you having a good Christmas break, those that can take one.

I am again building up my gear after having to sell stuff for other reasons and going down the mirrorless route which didn't do it for me. I have a 50mm 1.8 AF D lens and I am thinking of selling it. I know a lot about 50 on crop bodies. I shot portraits mostly as a hobby for more than a year just with this. There is something a wee bit bland about it. I am going to replace it with an 85. Now on my Nikon apsc, the field of view will be 127.5? which means standing quite far back from the subject for 3/4 body. More comfortable for headshots but it is worth it for the effect on the bokeh and general compression and feel of the shot. Many shoot portaits at 135 on ff which has a close fov. anyway, i will supplement it with a 17-50 2.8 DX lens. In case I am caught for space, need to go couples and groups, feel like going wide for artistic reasons and so on. My point, and I do have one ;), don't you think the 50 is not the best option for someone moving to primes from a kit lens when shooting on a crop body? Isn't a fast DX zoom or a 35mm far more useful as a general purpose lens? I am not so much looking for advice as making an observation. Another popular seller is a DX telephoto zoom from around 70-300. So, maybe for amateur sports its nice but not too good for wildlife and for portraits, I don't see how such a lens is really beneficial. They tend to be 4 or more at their narrow end. Not much light and to get good bokeh, equivalent to the 85 1.8, you would probably need to be shooting at 200? which means standing so far from your subject, it becomes impractical.

Anyway, your thoughts about 50 on crop and DX telephoto zooms vs a prime lenses 85 or 135. :)
 
Last edited:
I quite like the FF 85mm-ish FoV so 45 on MFT or 50mm on APS-C are ok with me. I'm less keen on the 135mm length as you need to be a bus ride away to include any context. It's ok for a tightish shot though.
 
Nifty-fifties sell to people with APS-C cameras more because they're usually the cheapest prime lens readily available rather than because it's an automatically useful focal length.

50mm is as useful as the number of uses you have for it. It's neither inherently more or less useful than any other focal length.

As a first focal length, I suspect 35mm-ish would be more useful to the most people. But those fifties are cheap...
 
I liked the 50mm when I was using a nikon DX - a great portrait and short tele.

Actually preferred it to the 35mm which I found was neither to much of an in-between. But focal length preferences are very personal things!
 
A 50mm f14 was my first DX prime lens. I used it a lot until I got a 35mm and an 85mm, both of which I now use a lot, and the 50mm not at all. Contrary to the popular wisdom, I prefer to use longer lenses for portraits, when space permits, longer than 85mm. Even on a crop sensor I don't regard 85mm as optimum for portraits, merely a convenient compromise between ideal length, which is longer, and the size of studios, which makes longer more inconvenient.
 
I've used my old Nikkor 50mm f1.4 on a 30D with an adapter. Works perfectly, but it's too long for a walk around, too short for a telephoto and I'm not interested in portraiture. I'd rather have a 30 - 35mm if I wanted a fast prime on a crop body.

That's my own, completely subjective, opinion of course...:)
 
You seem to be a little confused, most of your post talks about portraits which fast 50mm lenses excel at on s crop body. Then end by saying that a 50mm isn't a great general lens on a crop, which are you interested in?
 
My favourite lens on my D7000 is an old 50mm 1.4 - great for exquisite shots of my kids......and festival walk arounds.....
35mm for everything else!
 
nikon 35mm 1.8 great for inside normal size rooms in a house and you can zoom in using your feet
 
Personally I really like 50mm on a crop body more than I like it on FF, where I find it too wide for general use, not wide enough for a wide angle. It's a reason that I ditched the 50mm when I used to use film, preferring a 24-45 or 70-210. Having just started using a 50 on FX, I'm once again finding it wider than I want.
 
I have never been a fan of 50mm on DX or FX, it's a meh focal length (for me) on both sensors. People only buy it as it's so cheap, the cheapest lens could be a 35mm or 85mm and everyone would buy that in it's millions instead.

I'm not saying people don't find a use for the focal length for their shooting style, but I bet alot more people buy it for it's price point above all else.
 
stumeech said:
I have never been a fan of 50mm on DX or FX, it's a meh focal length (for me) on both sensors. People only buy it as it's so cheap, the cheapest lens could be a 35mm or 85mm and everyone would buy that in it's millions instead.

I'm not saying people don't find a use for the focal length for their shooting style, but I bet alot more people buy it for it's price point above all else.
Click to expand...

That's true for me - I would have rather had either a 35 or 75-80 (85 is a little too long for a walkabout lens) and if a 50 was the same price as a good example of either of those then I'd probably have bought a 75 instead.
 
ancient_mariner said:
That's true for me - I would have rather had either a 35 or 75-80 (85 is a little too long for a walkabout lens) and if a 50 was the same price as a good example of either of those then I'd probably have bought a 75 instead.
Click to expand...
Which makes me wonder why the old standard 35-70/3.5 lens fell by the wayside.
 
Probably because it was no more expensive to make a wider zoom rage (must be better, right) with a slightly slower max aperture and slightly lower image quality. Most people will want the longer range because they never enlarge much, and those who would have bought a high quality 35-70 probably just bout 2 more primes instead to enjoy a faster, higher quality lens.
 
i like 50mm on crop, its a great portrait length just the right amount of background compression. not to keen on it from full frame use
 
I loved the 50mm on my Nikon and felt it allowed me to get closer into candid shots on the street without stepping in too much. Great when starting. I then moved to 30mm and 24mm which I preferred but the size and weight of 50mm is amazing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top