Which 50mm for my D7000?

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 09:07

Slightly confused by the range of 50's available.

I'm looking at the 1.4D but there is also a 1.4G which is considerably more expensive. Are there any benefits of using the G model over the D with my camera?

Edit: I already own the 35mm and that is fantastic but I just want it slightly larger.

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 14:11

danoliver1 said:
The g model has inbuilt af motor so you can use it on d5100/d3100 etc which dont have in body af motors, cos you have d7000 which does have an in body af motor you can get the d version.
Have you looked at the sigma 50mm 1.4? Supposed to be very good.

I haven't no - worth a look then?

Edit: Is it the 50 1.4 EX DG ESM?

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 15:01

danoliver1 said:
Yep thats the one. Is it a wider apature you need or the longer focal length?

That's a good question - probably the wider aperture if I'm honest. The 35 I have is superb but I can struggle to squeeze things in.

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 16:27

Sorry - my lack of understanding. With the 35 it is a very good lens quality wise - the best portraits i take are crystal clear. But I find I cannot fit a lot into the shot unless (as you say) I stand back a bit. Usually this ends up in unwanted stuff in the background, or less clarity. I end up cropping some of the head, or shoulders. I would like to be able to squeeze a bit more into the frame - and I presumed the 50 would give me that little extra?

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 16:51

I've recently invested in a wide-angle (11-24) for landscapes and it's a great lens for that but it's not what I want for portraits. I got my knickers in a twist with the contrast between the 35-50. I don't have a kit lens or anything like that. Question - so if the 50 is approx 2 stops forward, what on earth do people use it for?

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 17:53

danoliver1 said:
a 35mm will make peoples noses and ears look bigger so less flattering than an 50mm. A lot of phographers wont use anything less than an 85mm, with the 135mm considered the best portrait lens.
I use my 35mm for full body portraits and the 50mm for head and shoulder shots.

That's interesting about the distortion. I still think a 50 would be a decent upgrade for me. I can't afford the 85s.

philstanbridge · 14 Aug 2013 at 18:32

danoliver1 said:
Then why not get the tamron 17-50 2.8 you then have a wide angle and a portrait lens in one package?

I think that is an excellent idea.

I will have a look.