Is it worth it purchase a 35mm prime if I already have a 50mm? Prepping for a corporate photo shoot.

[Arkitech]

I bought my first prime last year, the nifty fifty. Hands down my favorite piece of glass in my humble collection. In fact it's the only lense I have that's not a kit lense. It focuses fast, great in low light, beautiful bokeh and so on and so on. I'm so pleased with my first prime that now I want a second one. Wondering if the 35mm is a worthy addition.

The week after next I will be stepping into the arena of corporate photography. I'll be doing interior office shots and group pictures of a small staff. I'm really nervous and I want to be prepared with the best possible options. I'm using 2 Nikon bodies (D3300s), one will be the 50 and the other may wind up being my wide angle kit lens or perhaps another prime depending on what I can afford.


Thanks for any suggestions

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I'd go wider, in my opinion. I say that just because you said you're going to be doing interior office shots.

My only prime is also a 50/1.8 on a crop sensor, and I have my sights set on a 24/2.8. I also have the Tokina 11-16/2.8 for ultrawide shots though. It's pretty awesome. I think the 24/2.8 will fit nicely between the 50 and the ultrawide for me.

Having said that, I hear really, really good things about the 35/1.8 DX in terms of sharpness. The 24/2.8 seems not to be quite as amazing, from the reviews I've read. I'm kinda hoping to go full-frame soon though so that's why I'm leaning even more strongly to the 24.

I'd at least take your kit lens and test the field of view at 35mm to see how that focal length will do for what you want to shoot.

 

[radhak]

The 35mm 1.8DX is an awesome lens. I rate it even above the 50mm, and I had both of them for years to compare (with my D90 when I had it).

That said, you don't need both of them - the 35 is not much wider than the 50 to warrant adding to it. As Cerpin said, you should go wider - in the office, particularly when you have groups of people.

Of course, you said you want a prime (I assume your kit lens must be the 18-55 or something, so the wider group pictures are covered), and the 35mm is the cheapest option there, so you might take the plunge and test it out. But that 24mm f2.8 is not all that more expensive, and you might want to try it out instead (I have not used it, but have heard many good things about it).

 

[Syborg1211]

The 35mm is a great lens on crop sensor. I would say it is much more useful than a 50 on crop sensor, but I also prefer the wider angles. The biggest thing to be concerned about is working distance. How far will you be from your subject. You have to get pretty far away with the 50 on a crop sensor, but you can probably manage this is you're working in a large conference room or down a hallway. Just hope they don't set you up in a small office or cubicle.

 

[CuriousMike]

Do you have the 18-55 kit?

Set it to 35 mm

Set it to 50 mm

Compare.

When I had DX gear, I had the 35 and it was a great lens. It's certainly wider than the 50 on DX -- but when you say "interior office shots", that makes me worry that even 35 won't be wide enough.

If you can rent, you might look into renting a Nikon 20 or 24 f/1.8, or even the Sigma 18-35.

Regardless, owning the Nikon 35 f/1.8DX is a no-brainer for DX shooters.

 

[BoomerD]

Do you have the 18-55 kit?

Set it to 35 mm

Set it to 50 mm

Compare.

When I had DX gear, I had the 35 and it was a great lens. It's certainly wider than the 50 on DX -- but when you say "interior office shots", that makes me worry that even 35 won't be wide enough.

If you can rent, you might look into renting a Nikon 20 or 24 f/1.8, or even the Sigma 18-35.

Regardless, owning the Nikon 35 f/1.8DX is a no-brainer for DX shooters.

This is how I made the decision. Compare and choose what you like best for the particular application.

I got the 35 1.8 prime lens for Christmas from my wife. (I bought it, handed it to her and told her, "This is my X-mas present from you.")

So far, I have it on the camera (D3300) and have a B&W UV filter on it, (for lens protection, nothing else) but STILL haven't gone out shooting. (took a couple of shots in the house, just to play with it, but nothing worthwhile)
Once it warms up a tiny bit, I'll get out and shoot a few pics with it.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Note that on a D3300 the Nikon AF-D 24mm f/2.8 will not autofocus.

There is the AF-S 28mm f/1.8, but it is significantly more expensive than the AF-D 24/2.8

Frankly I wouldn't really fear the manual focusing on that wide of a lens, particularly given how light the cheaper one is.

 

[Syborg1211]

Do you have the 18-55 kit?

Set it to 35 mm

Set it to 50 mm

Compare.

When I had DX gear, I had the 35 and it was a great lens. It's certainly wider than the 50 on DX -- but when you say "interior office shots", that makes me worry that even 35 won't be wide enough.

If you can rent, you might look into renting a Nikon 20 or 24 f/1.8, or even the Sigma 18-35.

Regardless, owning the Nikon 35 f/1.8DX is a no-brainer for DX shooters.

Listen to this guy. The 35mm prime on DX was the beginning of my love for photography. It stayed glued on my camera for at least 6 months after I bought it.

 

[repoman0]

My lenses at the moment are 16, 23 and 35mm f/1.4 primes on a 1.5 crop factor camera (which I think is the same as yours?). I'd think the 35mm wouldn't be wide enough for interior shots... the angle of view is around 45 degrees.

The 23mm on the 1.5 crop factor sensor is just about perfect for every day use for me. Indoors, outdoors, landscapes, people ... I find it a very natural framing for a wide variety of subject matter. Sounds like the Nikon equivalent is a 24mm that others have mentioned.

 

[radhak]

This is how I made the decision. Compare and choose what you like best for the particular application.

I got the 35 1.8 prime lens for Christmas from my wife. (I bought it, handed it to her and told her, "This is my X-mas present from you.")

So far, I have it on the camera (D3300) and have a B&W UV filter on it, (for lens protection, nothing else) but STILL haven't gone out shooting. (took a couple of shots in the house, just to play with it, but nothing worthwhile)
Once it warms up a tiny bit, I'll get out and shoot a few pics with it.

Frankly, the most fun of the 35mm is indoors, when light is not so optimal and/or you don't want a flash. Like for a sleeping baby, or a playful pet, etc. Outdoors, with nice bright light, the 18-55 works just as good, but those conditions are where this tiny lens rules.

 

[ElFenix]

Frankly, the most fun of the 35mm is indoors, when light is not so optimal and/or you don't want a flash. Like for a sleeping baby, or a playful pet, etc. Outdoors, with nice bright light, the 18-55 works just as good, but those conditions are where this tiny lens rules.

playful pet and sleeping baby are small. group shots aren't. he needs a proper wide angle lens. i'd go wider than 24 because that's just starting to be wide on a crop body. there's a reason crop body kit lenses all start around 18 mm.

 

[CuriousMike]

And.. 18mm on DX is really 18*.15 = ~27mm... so, in-my-FX-mind, it's not *that* wide.
35*1.5 = 52mm, which is (depending on what you read) a "normal" view.

playful pet and sleeping baby are small. group shots aren't. he needs a proper wide angle lens. i'd go wider than 24 because that's just starting to be wide on a crop body. there's a reason crop body kit lenses all start around 18 mm.

 

[Rifter]

Frankly, the most fun of the 35mm is indoors, when light is not so optimal and/or you don't want a flash. Like for a sleeping baby, or a playful pet, etc. Outdoors, with nice bright light, the 18-55 works just as good, but those conditions are where this tiny lens rules.

Yes and no, the 18-55 is a great kit lens, of that there is no doubt, but if you are trying for a good Bokeh in your shot then the lower aperture on the 35mm will help you out. You can get good Bokeh with the 18-55mm IF you can get enough distance between the subject the background and the camera but thats not always the case, and in cases where that isnt the case the 35mm will help you achieve that goal.

I also agree with the people saying the 35mm might be to much zoom for indoor, i did some shots at my bro's wedding using my 35mm lens(inside his apartment, just parents and a minister there, very small downtown apartment) and was practically climbing the walls to get the shots, the kit lens would have been better but i forgot it at home, all i had on me at the time was my 35mm my 50mm and my 70-300. The shots turned out beautiful the 35mm is a great lens, just maybe not for close indoor shots.

 

[turtile]

I'd go around 25mm but you also want to make sure you fix the distortion which should be less of a problem on DX.

 

[Aharami]

get the Sigma 24-35 f/2. You almost get two primes in one lens there

 

[MrSquished]

I shoot interiors of both residential and sometimes an office space here or there. Without people in the shots.

I shoot at the FF equivalent of 18mm almost all of the time. I could see in a larger office not needing something as wide but definitely still pretty wide. All depends how much stuff like desks and office furniture are in your foreground.

 

[ElFenix]

I shoot interiors of both residential and sometimes an office space here or there. Without people in the shots.

I shoot at the FF equivalent of 18mm almost all of the time. I could see in a larger office not needing something as wide but definitely still pretty wide. All depends how much stuff like desks and office furniture are in your foreground.

sigma 12-24?

 

[jtvang125]

Don't forget you can always rent lenses if you don't want to buy.