NateNLogansDad
Still Wish'n
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2009
- Messages
- 2,759
I was looking at a Nikon 35mm for my D5000. Cost is always a concern in my house so the 1.8 looks to be favorable to me. Is the 1.4 really worth the extra $400 compared to the 1.8?
Ann, we are all freinds here, so NO FIBBINGI could possibly own just this lens and be happy.


Well it's about a 2/3 stop difference as far as light gathering is concerned. That can make a difference in tight spots for sure - say being able to squeeze out a 1/60 shutter speed on a dark ride instead of falling into the 1/30 speed - just enough to avoid some blur.
But it's not huge. If you're looking at that much of a price difference, I'd say it's probably fine with the F1.8 for basic use. Note there may be some other differences, like build quality, manufl focus ring, etc.
I also agree with Anne's comment on the Sigma 30mm F1.4 as a very nice alternative to consider...it is silky smooth bokeh, has nice wide reach on crop sensor cams that is just about ideal (45mm), and is extremely sharp even wide open, but moreso at F2 and beyond. And for the money, might be worth consideration - the price difference should be a hundred or so cheaper than the Nikon 35 F1.4, sort of the middle ground price-wise between the two Nikon lenses.
I wouldn't skip a Disney trip for anything! No, honestly, if it's that tight or close on money vs justifying the purchase, I'd probably either wait on the lens purchase and go to Disney without, or buy the F1.8 and enjoy. It's not that terribly expensive a purchase that you couldn't sell it for some change and upgrade later if you wanted to.
And then there's the used option...I noticed one on EBay selling from KEH:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...ff39c01&itemid=290372379632&ff4=263602_263622
I have bought from KEH plenty - and find them very solid and reliable. Used might be worth a look for any of the lenses you are considering!
I think I may have worded that poorly. I meant skip a trip with a prime lens or go get the 1.8 now
I'm on the wrong boards if I were asking someone about NOT taking a trip!I'm finding myself in a similar situation. I am looking for a prime lens but wondering which will be the best for my money. I have a Canon 300D so I need the most out of a lens that I can get since I find the pictures barely usable at all at ISO 1600. I've been leaning towards the Sigma 50 1.4 but am wondering if I'm better getting the Canon 50 1.8 for "quick fix" and then getting a better 30mm lens later on down the road. The only "nice" thing is I don't have the pressure of a trip coming up until 2011, but waiting that long isn't nice in actuality.
I just got the Nikon 35mm AF-S f/1.8 a few weeks ago and have no regrets. In fact, it has not left my camera.




I have the Nikon 35mm 1.8 also and really enjoyed it at Disney.
On the D60 with that lens I was able to get usable shots in Small World, indoors at character meals without flash, and in Festival of the Lion King.
Haunted Mansion and Peter Pan were a no-go, but I don't think a 1.4 lens would have helped that... I needed a better sensor/better ISO capabilities (and more skill). The D5000 has the same sensor as the D90, doesn't it? So with the 1.8 and that sensor it would be possible to get usable shots there, too.
I have the Nikon 35mm 1.8 (my wife gave it to me on our last Disney trip as an anniversary gift).
Having never used the Sigma, I can't give a comparison, but I really like the 35mm 1.8.

Yea, it has the same sensor as the D90. The biggest difference between the D90 and my personal camera is that the D90 usually has a good photographer behind it. Mine has to deal with me. Poor thing.

That so sweet! I'd be afraid of my wife picking up something for my camera!
