# Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G or AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G



## olikuan (Sep 14, 2011)

Hope you guys can help me on this. I have a nikon d7000, what would be a better choice between the two lenses? I would be using this lens for portrait shots.

Also, can someone enlighten me on what would be the effect of putting a FX lens on a DX body aside from not being able to utilize the full functionality of the lens and wasting some money. From what I've understand, there is a cropping factor to consider. A 35mm DX lens would give out the same angle of view as a 53mm FX lens? So if I would buy the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G (FX lens) would the focal lenght be affected when used on the DX body?


----------



## MTVision (Sep 14, 2011)

Do you have a lens that covers both these focal ranges now?? If so, spend a day walking around with the lens @ 35. Then do the same @ 50 and see which you like better.

FX lens on DX body:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nikon-lenses/254695-do-fx-lenses-work-dx-cameras.html


----------



## MTVision (Sep 14, 2011)

I have the 50mm f/1.4g (FX) lens for my DX body and I love it.  Perfect for portraits because its FOV is about 72mm.


----------



## PatrickJamesYu (Sep 14, 2011)

olikuan said:


> Also, can someone enlighten me on what would be the effect of putting a FX lens on a DX body aside from not being able to utilize the full functionality of the lens and wasting some money.



Where did you hear this?
I don't know if I fully agree with this statement at all.
It wont be as wide, but I don't think that means you can't utilize the full functionality of the lens, it's just "different".
I don't think money is really wasted.

Nikon designed the 35mm lens as a 50mm replacement for DX body's.
I believe the crop is 1.5 difference for Nikons, so yes the 35mm is 52.5mm.

This next part I'm only 90% sure about.
The number 50mm and 35mm isn't in relation to the body.
It's about distance and that distance stays the same, so if you put a 50mm FX on a DX body you will still have to do the math
If you put a 35mm DX on a DX body, you still have to do the math.


----------



## trizzo (Sep 14, 2011)

I have 35 f1.8 G and 50 f1.8 D. I am using them on Nikon D90 and I am very satisfied. 35 oneI am using as my every day lense and 50 one I usually use for portraits. I bought the older 50 just because at the beginning of 2011 the newer G lense was not available yet.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk


----------



## olikuan (Sep 15, 2011)

Thanks for the helpful insights guys...


MTVision said:


> Do you have a lens that covers both these focal ranges now?? If so, spend a day walking around with the lens @ 35. Then do the same @ 50 and see which you like better.


I bought the D7000 body only, currently I'm using an old lens 28-200mm AF-D the problem of this lens is that it only focuses to about 6 feet at any focal length.  


trizzo said:


> I have 35 f1.8 G and 50 f1.8 D. I am using them on Nikon D90 and I am very satisfied. 35 oneI am using as my every day lense and 50 one I usually use for portraits.


if i will be using it primarily for portrait shots then i'm better off buying the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G another question since the price difference is a bit big is the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G worth buying???


----------



## trizzo (Sep 15, 2011)

I had a chance to test for 2 days that 1.4 version of prime fifty and it was amaizing lense. If you have a budget go for 1.4. If not 1.8 G will do a great job for you.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk


----------



## MTVision (Sep 15, 2011)

trizzo said:
			
		

> I had a chance to test for 2 days that 1.4 version of prime fifty and it was amaizing lense. If you have a budget go for 1.4. If not 1.8 G will do a great job for you.
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk



I have the nifty fifty 1.4 as well. It is an amazing lens but I have never used the 1.8. It's great for portraits. It hasn't left my camera since I bought it almost a month ago. The price is a bit steeper but the quality is better.


----------

