# Nikon D5000 - need a better lens for outdoor shoots



## addyboo (Jun 4, 2010)

I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice on some auto focus lens that I can use to improve my outdoor shoots.  I'm a portraiture photographer and need it to get more light into my camera so I don't have to depend of my flash ALL the time.  

I contacted my local photo shop and they mentioned these two lenses.  What's your input?
 AF-S 35mm 1.8  
AF-S 50mm 1.4 

Is there a HUGE difference between the two of these? Also 35mm vs 50mm.  What's best for what I do?  

Thanks so much!!


----------



## reznap (Jun 4, 2010)

What lens do you have now?  18-55 kit lens?  What focal length do you  usually shoot portraits with it with?  Do you zoom in all the way or  keep it a little bit out and step closer? 

There isn't a huge difference in the aperture, both are fast lenses.  The extra 2/3 stop (I think it's 2/3..) on the 50mm make it better for low light.

I'd go with the 50mm for portraits.  The increased focal length and maximum aperture or f/1.4 will give you an EXTREMELY shallow depth of field for close-ups, which is difficult to work with at times but very cool when you get the focus right.


----------



## MGY (Jun 4, 2010)

if you want to save money and dont really care about auto focus, consider the 50mm f1.8.  its about 1/4 the cost of the AFS 50mm f1.4


----------



## reznap (Jun 4, 2010)

MGY said:


> if you want to save money and dont really care about auto focus, consider the 50mm f1.8.  its about 1/4 the cost of the AFS 50mm f1.4



I wouldn't recommend that, having a better 50mm has its benefits.  I'd like to replace my cheap Canon 50..

If you want to consider a Sigma 50mm 1.4, it's $500 but a terrific lens, the one I want eventually (only in Canon mount).

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50mm-Nikon-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0018ZDGAW/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1275675320&sr=8-2]Amazon.com: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics[/ame]


----------



## MGY (Jun 4, 2010)

reznap said:


> MGY said:
> 
> 
> > if you want to save money and dont really care about auto focus, consider the 50mm f1.8.  its about 1/4 the cost of the AFS 50mm f1.4
> ...



true, but I just couldnt justify the cost of the 1.4.  i have an autofocus motor on my body though, but the 1.4 non afs was still too expensive for me.


----------



## jnm (Jun 4, 2010)

MGY said:


> if you want to save money and dont really care about auto focus, consider the 50mm f1.8. its about 1/4 the cost of the AFS 50mm f1.4



it's a perfectly fine lens except it wont autofocus on the D5000.

OP: why do you need a faster lens for outside?  where do you shoot in daytime that the 18-55 isnt fast enough?  or is it that you want shallower depth of field?


----------



## reznap (Jun 4, 2010)

jnm said:


> MGY said:
> 
> 
> > if you want to save money and dont really care about auto focus, consider the 50mm f1.8. its about 1/4 the cost of the AFS 50mm f1.4
> ...



It'll manual focus, just not auto focus.  It lacks a focusing motor.

As for the reason I recommended the Sigma, it's *sharp *at f/1.4.  The canon 50mm f/1.4 isn't really.  I'm not sure how well the Nikon performs, but if it has issues with being soft while wide open, the Sigma is a reasonable consideration for the extra $60 or whatever it is..


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Jun 4, 2010)

jnm said:


> OP: why do you need a faster lens for outside?  where do you shoot in daytime that the 18-55 isnt fast enough?  or is it that you want shallower depth of field?


I was thinking the same thing. I have used my 18-55 and 55-200 outside and never had any issues during the day. 

Can we see some samples showing the issues your having?


----------



## supraman215 (Jun 4, 2010)

I love my 35mm 1.8. It allows PLENTY of light in. I got the 35 because on a DX camera (D3000, D5000, D90, D300) 35mm focal length is equivalent to 52mm which is almost "normal" focal length either wide nor telephoto. 50 is a little tighter and you're going to have to be a little further back from the subject. It would technically be considered telephoto. If I had an FX camera it would be the 50mm no question. The 35 is also only $199, that's with internal focus.


----------



## gpardo64 (Jun 4, 2010)

Get the 35mm f1.8. It will focus in your D5000. The 50mm will not and the difference in price is only $ 70 bucks.

The 35mm lens is one the last produced by Nikon for DX format only which is the format of your camera. Also it will work in the D40, D3000, D90, D300 which are DX format. FYI, It won't work in the D700, D3 etc which are FX sensor formats, so it may be an issue if some day you migrate to one of those cameras.


----------



## jnm (Jun 4, 2010)

reznap said:


> jnm said:
> 
> 
> > MGY said:
> ...



ya oops, was writing both 'need to manual' and 'wont auto'... and it came out wont manual


----------



## KmH (Jun 4, 2010)

addyboo said:


> I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice on some auto focus lens that I can use to improve my outdoor shoots. I'm a portraiture photographer and need it to get more light into my camera so I don't have to depend of my flash ALL the time.
> 
> I contacted my local photo shop and they mentioned these two lenses. What's your input?
> AF-S 35mm 1.8
> ...


But, but, but....Using your flash outside all the time likely makes your photos look better than competitors photos, *if* you know how to use flash effectively outdoors.

You get the chance to make 2 separate exposures with a single shutter release. You can shoot mid-day and have it look like you shot at dusk. You can shoot backlit subjects and still make them 'pop'.

So if you do get fast glass, keep using the flash, but be sure and get it off the camera if you don't already. Visit www.strobist.com for OCF (Off-Camera-Flash) info.

Be careful with 35 mm (and 50 mm) that it doesn't distort your subjects face (jutting nose syndrome). 85 mm, 105 mm, and 200 mm are also good portrait focal lengths.


----------

