Moddiction

I am wondering how this prime lens would be. I have heard it takes some really good pictures for all around use which would be nice but wondering if this would be a good choice for doing product pictures in a light box as well?

I know being a prime lens it won't zoom but that should matter for that if I can just move the camera closer.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_1_8G.html


Let me know what you think. Reviews are good and for $200 it's quite cheap. I'm very new to cameras so don't know if there would be a better option than this for a good all around lens. I am currently using the stock lens that came with my Nikon d3100.

humbucker87

Edit: I'm an idiot and somehow read the link as the 50mm 1.8 instead of the 35mm 1.8. All of what I wrote below still stands, but now I probably also agree with dwight that while I think you could make the 35mm work, it's probably a tad too wide.

The 50mm 1.8 (for both canon and nikon) is usually referred to as the 'nifty fifty'. The reason being is that it's soooo good for the price. Sharper than most zooms, fast aperture, and 50mm (at least on a full frame body) is usually referred to as being equivalent to how your eye's perceive things (what you see is what you get).

I also just recently purchased this lens and love it. I'm going to post a few pictures below. However, before I do that I thought I would mention that if you are really targeting product photos that you might be better served by a macro/micro lens. The 50mm doesn't focus all that close and especially for small products you might find you're having to crop the photos alot. I don't have any experience with it, but this macro lens is only a little bit more money than the 50mm (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-40mm-2-8...ds=nikon+macro). Maybe others who do a lot of product photography can chime in.

Here are some photos with my nifty fifty.

dwight

I feel that 35mm is too short of a lens for product photos. Moving the camera closer will cause more perspective distortion.

IIGQ4U

I would probably pick up a 35mm which will have a similar FOV as a 50mm on a full frame as well as a 50mm 1.8.

CAP5U73

that 35mm lens is a great deal for what you get, if you are running a DX and do not plan to upgrade to a FX i would definitely pick that up unless you are planning on getting the 50mm 1.4 which runs around 500. I dont know that either are great product lenses though. If you want a really nice product lens i would recommend nikons 105mm. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...D_IF_AF_S.html

primes are pricey but you can get a lot more out of them.

klopez

i just picked up a 35mm 1.8g for the d3100 and wow is it sharp. i say pick up the lens used on craigslist, i only paid 150 for its with all original paper work anf box.

shy_guyAP1

I have that exact lens and love it. I think I paid $135 new.

Mocky

I was going to say..for closeups, the 35 or 50 might not be the best choice... The 105 is something I'm currently looking into...


The other option (although not maybe ideal) would be a macro extension tube.. I have one that I use on my old 50mm 1.8.

Murphg05

I have both the 50 and 35 in 1.8. I prefer the 35, just seems to have a better quality picture. BUT both do really well as a macro lens depending on how close you are talking about getting. Best investment I made though was my 70-200 2.8... I end up using it for most siituations. You can always rent one before you buy and see what you prefer.... nothing worse than buying and not liking how it works

babowc

35 1.8 is an excellent lens for DX.
The focal range, after the crop factor, will put you right around 50mm which is very versatile.
For distortion, you can fix it in post.
Also, if you ever plan on upgrading to FX, the 35mm 1.8G will work on FX (with vignetting)

The lens you're looking at has great optics at a great price.
I'd recommend it!