• http://www.facebook.com/joe.stockdale.3 Joe Stockdale

    I wouldn’t advise a 50mm on a DX body, not now, not ever

    • juan

      why not?, it’s very useful…it depends on what you shoot…but I have the 1.4, and I’m very pleased with it…also the 85 f/1.8 AF-S my lovely prime lens!

    • http://twitter.com/axian A.X. Ian

      That’s quite possibly the worst advice, ever.

      50mm are practically made for the DX bodies because they’re cheap, relatively sharp, and produce amazing photographs, even in beginner hands.

      The above 50mm 1.4f is a bit of an overkill for DX, unless you have money to burn. Most people would be fine with “cheaper” 50mm 1.8G at half the price.

      Prime lenses by themselves are not enough. You will need a zoom lens to cover all the bases. But purchasing a 50mm with a DSLR is a no-brainer these days.

  • Joe

    The 24-85 vr2 would be great too, fullframe but very sharp on dx too…

  • Adelphos

    10-24, 16-85 or 24-85, 70-300 and 35 and 50 or a variation of primes. For those who are in the under $1,000 per lens financial bracket I would keep an eye on these.

  • frank bower

    Wow! 50mm is still the best lens. Always was. Designed as the standard for 35mm cameras, the optical properties were always superior to other mm’s. Even though 35mm would be my desired mm on a DX, the optical properties are not as good as most 50mm lenses. And it’s harder to find large apertures in the other than 50mm lenses. I love my old Nikkor F 50mm f1.4. No need for VR or autofocus.

  • sammy

    My combo is: Standard: Samyang 35/1.4, Wide: Tokina 11-16, Zoom: Tamron 70-200 VC, Macro: Tokina 100/2.8D.

  • Ronnie Kin

    Have you ever consider the
    Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD, for standard zoom? is f/2.8 permanent and a good price.

  • Mickster

    70-300VR , relatively useless for good quality after 150-200mm in my books & AF is not the best, nor is it’s VR .. keep saving is my advice. But if $800 or under is your max limit, then you’ll be hard pushed to do better , remember it’s an FX lens, so you get more for your $’s on a DX body

  • manwithacamera

    You’re missing a very important point. On a full frame camera (and old film cameras), the 50mm was a standard lens. On a DX 24mm camera, 50mm is not a standard lens; a standard lens is 35mm.
    Hence, this whole review is flawed. I think it was probably written for a full frame camera and copied over.
    If you put a 50mm lens on a D7100, it equivalent to a 70mm on a full frame camera. If you cast your mind back to days of old, the 70-80mm range was considered portrait.

Back to top
mobile desktop