What lenses to go with my 50mm on FX

  • Thread starter Thread starter JJ!
  • Start date Start date
JJ!

JJ!

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,822
Edit My Images
No
After going through 3-4 35mm lenses due to so wanting the 35/85 to work for me, it just didn't. 35mm is just not for me. Guess I was sold in to the 35/85 combo by what I read online and nothing to do with my actual experience.

I love working with my 50mm, it's light, small, sharp and its a focal length I enjoy.

But, there will be a time when I need something wider and something longer.

I'm on a budget so might not be able to buy things straight away.

I was considering the 28mm f2.8 AF-D. Mainly because it's small and cheaper than the new 1.8g. Plus this will probably not get a huge amount of use but it's something I probably need in my bag. Anyone got one or used one?

Next up, it's beyond the 50mm. I could pick up an 85mm, but just how much would I use it over the 50 I don't know. 70-200 are a bit big and expensive right now although the F4 version looks interesting.

Any suggestions welcome. I have looked at the 24-120 but not really sold on it and although I have a 24-85, I'm not sure I want that either as enjoying using primes right now.

Oh dear, written and waffled on too much so will leave it there!
 
As you have found, internet opinion really means little when it comes to your shooting so not really sure what advice people can give.

FWIW I don't really get on with 35mm either, I always like the shots it produces but I find it an effort to use whereas 50mm just seems natural.

When going a bit wider I prefer 28mm, problem being the old Nikon 28mm really isn't that good and will certainly be found wanting on a modern high res camera.
 
Last edited:
Nawty said:
As you have found, internet opinion really means little when it comes to your shooting so not really sure what advice people can give.

FWIW I don't really get on with 35mm either, I always like the shots it produces but I find it an effort to use whereas 50mm just seems natural.

When going a bit wider I prefer 28mm, problem being the old Nikon 28mm really isn't that good and will certainly be found wanting on a modern high res camera.
Click to expand...

That is a shame! The 28mm f1.8g is out of reach if I want the 85mm f1.8g too. Guess I need to decide what is more impotant!

I know that I could get the wide shots using the 24-85 but that seems a kind of waste as I dont think I would use it for anything else now I have started taking the 50 out with me on regular occasions.
 
I'd be tempted to get the 28mm (or at least a wider angle than 50mm) first - you can sort of achieve the 85mm effect with your existing lens through cropping whereas to go wider you'd need to start stitching, which is a faff and isn't possible for shots with movement...
 
Yeah I know I need something wider, especially if I want to do some group shots at weddings or of friends.
 
If you didn't like 35mm, is 28mm really going to be all that different?

I'd go 24mm if you want something wider.
 
JYC said:
If you didn't like 35mm, is 28mm really going to be all that different?

I'd go 24mm if you want something wider.
Click to expand...


I find it is, 28mm is just wide enough to start getting some perspective distortion without it looking weird, 24mm is very obviously wide. Of course everyone has different requirements.
 
JYC said:
If you didn't like 35mm, is 28mm really going to be all that different?

I'd go 24mm if you want something wider.
Click to expand...

Its not going to be that different I guess, but still need something wider for those just in case shots were the 50 will be too long.
 
Well the older f/2.8 24mm is a much better lens than the 28mm, you can easily get an AF version (not AFD) for under £200.
 
Just found some 24mm f2.8D lenses going for around £240 new which looks like an viable option.
 
I haven't used them but from what I have read the 28mm D lens isn't that great and the 20mm and 24mm are better options. The new 20mm G lens gets some excellent reviews.

The other option if you can save up, is something like the Sigma 24-35mm f2 ART lens to give more flexability. Heavy lens though.
 
Swanseajack said:
I haven't used them but from what I have read the 28mm D lens isn't that great and the 20mm and 24mm are better options. The new 20mm G lens gets some excellent reviews.

The other option if you can save up, is something like the Sigma 24-35mm f2 ART lens to give more flexability. Heavy lens though.
Click to expand...

In that sense I guess the 18-35 is an option too.
 
JJ! said:
In that sense I guess the 18-35 is an option too.
Click to expand...

Worth a try, it's well thought of on the D750 thread. Land and sea scapes is what I want to try more of this year, and for me, I bought a Tamron 19-35mm for the wide angle shots to try out. Not the greatest optically but if I find I enjoy the genre of photography I will buy a better lens in the coming months. You can get these for less than £100, they also come in Vivitar, Cosina etc.. branding, but their all the same just different badges. So maybe another option? The Nikon 20mm G lens is on my radar.
 
JJ! said:
In that sense I guess the 18-35 is an option too.
Click to expand...
Great lens (y) (well the G version anyway ;))

What about something like the 24-120mm f4 and then just use your prime for those times you want something a bit more special?
 
I'm selling a 24-120 right now. Not keen on size and weight and much prefer going out and about with the 50!
 
I have 4 primes in my Nikon system and although they do get used from time to time, they're relatively specialised in their uses for me. The 8mm is a fisheye, the 14 is a fast ultrawide, the 50 is just fast and the 105 is a macro. Unless I need the special feature that the primes offer, I'll stick with the zooms, most often the 24-120 f/4 (far better than he older, variable aperture version.) If I want smaller and lighter, I'll use the Fuji system instead!
 
Nikon 80-200 f2.8 (any variant)

I have the one touch earliest example and it's as sharp as a sharp thing at f2.8.

Great lens for a bargain price.
 
JJ! said:
In that sense I guess the 18-35 is an option too.
Click to expand...
If you don't need f1.8 or f2.8 then the 18-35 is a good choice. If you do need faster then 35mm is, IMO, too close to 50mm so 28mm or wider. At the other end 85mm might be a nice complement for 50mm, although I prefer 100mm. Avoid all fast zooms if you want to keep the weight down. They might be very good, but they are stupidly heavy.

As always YMMV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top