35mm or 50mm Standard Primes?


weeloong

New Member
Jan 4, 2011
59
0
0
38
#1
I have read that when considering for prime lens for non-full frame sensor DSLRs, that the 35mm is better than the 50mm ones...

is that any basis on this?

I am thinking of getting a prime lens for sharper portraits.. are there other benefits of using a prime lens (besides being able to shoot at faster speeds in low-light)?

Appreciate the advice..

thax
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#2
I have read that when considering for prime lens for non-full frame sensor DSLRs, that the 35mm is better than the 50mm ones...

is that any basis on this?

I am thinking of getting a prime lens for sharper portraits.. are there other benefits of using a prime lens (besides being able to shoot at faster speeds in low-light)?

Appreciate the advice..

thax
since I own both, maybe I chip in with my 2c.

I find the 35mm focal length to be more comfortable to use regularly on a DX camera.
The distance you have to stand from your subject in order to get 2 or 3 people in is a good deal less than when using the 50.

But in summary I can't say which one is better, coz 50 still has its uses. It really depends on what you're trying to shoot.
For example, in a small studio, I find 50mm to be the more useful focal length.
 

Jun 22, 2010
850
3
0
Singapore
#3
I have read that when considering for prime lens for non-full frame sensor DSLRs, that the 35mm is better than the 50mm ones...

is that any basis on this?

I am thinking of getting a prime lens for sharper portraits.. are there other benefits of using a prime lens (besides being able to shoot at faster speeds in low-light)?

Appreciate the advice..

thax
50mm - Better bokeh (note that bokeh is affected by focal length on top of aperture and some other factors).

35mm - Nearer working distance and useful especially for indoor shots or food shots.

However, if your subject is a stray cat for example, 50mm is better working distance as u do not need to be so near to the subject compare to 35mm.

It really depends on what you want to shoot.

Hope it helps.
 

Last edited:
Jul 11, 2010
113
0
0
East
#5
Sorry to ask this question here, hmmm but just wanna find out if using 35mm on dx body to shoot street photography, must I stand real close to my subject??
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#6
Sorry to ask this question here, hmmm but just wanna find out if using 35mm on dx body to shoot street photography, must I stand real close to my subject??
depends what you mean by 'real close', and also how large you want your subject to be relative to your image.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#7
i concur. 50mm in a studio shoot will be more useful (for FF users)

general use wise, i prefer 35mm over 50mm which gives me more room to work on.
I use 50mm on a DX body :)

if FX I would go for the 85.

then again it also depends on whether you're after headshots or half-body or full-body, ya? :angel:
 

Astroben

New Member
Aug 3, 2010
289
0
0
#8
'better' because 35 give a more usable FOV for general photography on DX.

However if u like portrait then definitely 50mm better in this case as your subject features looks more natural perspective-wise
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#9
'better' because 35 give a more usable FOV for general photography on DX.

However if u like portrait then definitely 50mm better in this case as your subject features looks more natural perspective-wise
just wanna clarify that it's the camera-subject distance which affects the perspective, not the focal length of the lens.
 

Astroben

New Member
Aug 3, 2010
289
0
0
#10
ZerocoolAstra said:
just wanna clarify that it's the camera-subject distance which affects the perspective, not the focal length of the lens.
Sorry for not making myself clear, I was refering to when comparing between these 2 focal length at the same subject-to-frame coverage.
Recently I nothing to do so I took pictures of my wife with her face covering the whole frame. Tested on both focals and as you experts should know, 35mm bloats up her nose. Haha.
So if TS needs portraits that closes in till shoulder level then 50mm would be good;)
Agree?
 

Deathegg

New Member
Dec 4, 2010
393
0
0
Punggol
#11
I choose 35mm coz you can comfortably take a pic of 2 or 3 across a dinner table at weddings. 50mm probably only fits 1.
 

Astroben

New Member
Aug 3, 2010
289
0
0
#12
Deathegg said:
I choose 35mm coz you can comfortably take a pic of 2 or 3 across a dinner table at weddings. 50mm probably only fits 1.
Exactly the reason why I go 35mm first more usable as You can also cover half-body portraits too!
Still thinking if to get the cheap 50mm f/1.8.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#13
Sorry for not making myself clear, I was refering to when comparing between these 2 focal length at the same subject-to-frame coverage.
Recently I nothing to do so I took pictures of my wife with her face covering the whole frame. Tested on both focals and as you experts should know, 35mm bloats up her nose. Haha.
So if TS needs portraits that closes in till shoulder level then 50mm would be good;)
Agree?
Totally! :thumbsup:
 

Akatsuki

New Member
Mar 2, 2008
1,275
0
0
31
Serangoon
www.alanang.smugmug.com
#15
for portrait, i will recommend the 50mm, be it DX or FX... but do note that if you are shooting in a studio or room, 50mm can be tight on DX... this is where 35mm would be better, and do note that 35mm is more usable for general shoots as well, as compared to 50mm :)
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,645
63
48
lil red dot
#16
I will throw 2 more focal lengths into the mix for APS-C based cameras...

24mm and 30mm...

24mm on cropped will give you the FOV of 35mm on FF. Very very useful focal length.

30mm on cropped will give you FOV of around 45mm on FF, which is much closer to "standard" focal length. Not to mention also that Sigma makes a 30/1.4 that is excellent.
 

Top Bottom