The 35mm And 85mm

13 Responses to The 35mm And 85mm

1. Roland Pache 21 April, 2012 at 6:53 pm

   Hi Chris,

   I just stumbled across your site while browsing for prime lens articles.
   I am also shooting Nikon and have collected the f/2.8 trinity, which I think are all three absolutely fantastic lenses. However, changing my style away from landscapes and towards portraiture I found myself wanting the faster f/1.4 primes, also originating from getting great pics from the 50mm f/1.4G lens. Also, as a walk around lens, the 24-70 is indeed a bit heavy, and I also think using it makes me going the easy route of just zooming to the frame I want, instead of moving my body to get the right composition.
   Now that you acquired the 35 and 85 primes, how happy are you with those?
   Do you miss the 24mm angle of view of the zoom?
   And what about the weight of the f/1.4 primes (35+85 are actually more heavy than the 24-70 alone), does it feel right for you or would you recommend considering the new 28 and 85 f/1.8G lenses instead that just came out? (from the reviews I read it seems they are almost as good optically, but at a much lower price point)

   Looking forward to hear from you!

   Best,
   Roland

   Reply
   • Chris 21 April, 2012 at 10:16 pm

     Hey Roland

     Yes I’m very happy with the 35mm and 85mm. They compliment each other really well. The 85mm for distance/portraits, and the 35 for everything else!

     I didn’t use the 24mm end of the 24-70mm, that’s where it was optically weakest. If were to need a wide angle, I wouldn’t use a prime, I would get a decent zoom like the 14-24, but that is both heavy and expensive, so I just live without one!

     The 35mm is great focal length that isn’t too wide, but just wide enough to use comfortably indoors, and for portraits with a bit more “space”

     You are right that the 35/85mm together weigh more than the 24-70mm, but on the other hand, I use only these 2 lenses for everything. I don’t carry around anything else apart from a couple of SB900′s and some kenko tubes for macro work. I like to keep it simple. Carrying kilos of gear around for hours makes me grumpy.

     It’s tough call about the new 1.8 primes, they do look very very good, but I still think I would have chosen the 1.4 versions, just because they are the only lenses I use. But if I was supplementing my main kit with primes, I would go for the 1.8 versions, they seem good value for money.

     Hope this helps!

     Thanks

     Reply
     • Roland Pache 21 April, 2012 at 10:54 pm

       Hey Chris,

       thanks fro your reply, I am getting more and more sold on getting the 35+85 1.4 primes.

       I agree that the 24mm end of the 24-70 is not the best and, since I have the 14-24, I often went to that one when needing a wide angle. However, carrying both of them around is indeed quite heavy, resulting in sore shoulders at the end of the day even without carrying a telephoto lens in addition…

       I was therefore also considering to go for the 24 f/1.4 lens, but that one is even more expensive and right now I can’t afford more than two of the 1.4 primes.
       I love wide angle shots though, so I might still want to save up for one, but not this year

       My love for wide angles probably comes from my background in landscape photography, but since I now want to focus more on portraiture, the 35mm angle of view might be enough for most situations (especially since with a shorter focal length you really need to pay attention to not distorting faces too much).

       My concern about the 1.8 primes is mainly their build quality, they seem to be a bit plasticy. I like your point of supplementing the already heavy f/2.8 kit with the lighter f/1.8 primes, but, similar to yourself, I am tending more and more towards shooting primes only (except perhaps for the excellent 70-200 f/2.8 VR II, which is able to deliver incredible head shots). So going with what you said before, it probably makes more sense to exchange the 24-70 with the pro-grade 1.4 primes rather than aiming for the more consumer-grade 1.8 lenses.

       Best,
       Roland

       Reply
       • Roland Pache 22 April, 2012 at 7:10 pm

         small addon question:

         Did you ever regret selling the 50 1.4G, or don’t you miss that focal length in your shooting sessions?

         Roland

         Reply
         • Chris 22 April, 2012 at 8:35 pm

           No I didn’t actually. The 50mm f1.4 was my absolute favourite lens for a long long time.

           But it was the weakest of the three primes, it just didn’t get much use. The 35mm is a little bigger, but it’s gets in closer (0.3m) and its sharper wide open, which makes up for it.

           The 50mm is a almost perfect all round focal length though. I plan to buy the Nikon 50 f1.2 ais when I find a decent second hand FE2.
2. phototrope 18 May, 2012 at 6:27 pm

   Hi Chris,
   I just came across this page (googling for nikon 35mm 85mm) and your website for the first time. Really chuckled when I read this page because I have, after a very long-winded process, also settled on exactly the same lens combo as you. The nikon 35/85 f1.4g lenses and a D800. I also have a 50/1.2 ais which I use occasionally when i feel like travelling light. Then I read the rest of your blog and your photographic journey and it seems to mirror mine in so many ways. I haven’t got website though. Really like yours. Very inspiring. Thanks mate

   Reply
   • Chris Nash 21 May, 2012 at 10:49 pm

     Hey. Thanks for commenting. Glad to hear I’m not the only one mad enough to go down the two prime route! It’s not one thing I have come across a lot, but I find it work really rather well. Its so weird that we both think similarly, as my next lens to buy is the 50mm f1.2, once I have found a good condition Nikon FE2 for it to go on!

     Reply

3. Pingback: Preparing For Wedding Photography | Chris Nash Photography | Gloucestershire Portrait Photographer

4. Lee 17 July, 2012 at 8:47 pm

   When I bought my Nikon d7000 earlier this year I sold my zooms and began only using either a Nikkor 50mm 1.8g or 28mm 1.8d. The latter has been the primary lens ever since. I am seriously considering the new voigtlander 28mm though as the colour rendition is simply gorgeous. My Belgian mate has the 48mm version on his D700 and his images from them are stunning. Loving the blog since I found it while researching think tank retrospective bags….

   Reply
   • Chris Nash 18 July, 2012 at 1:09 pm

     Thanks Lee.

     Yes there are certainly some great primes out there. The colours that a some lenses can produce can be subtle but really unique.

     Will have a look at that voitglander lens….

     Reply
5. Mark 29 November, 2012 at 11:42 am

   Chris,

   Be super keen to know whether things are still hunky-dory with this two prime combo? Asking since I’m contemplating a similar move - trading my 24/50/85 combo for the simpler 35/85mms. So I wonder what exercising this discipline looks with 6 months over your shoulder.

   Cheers,
   Mark

   Reply
   • Chris Scuffins 30 November, 2012 at 6:26 pm

     Absolutely. My move to Canon was a great decision. However, I am without a 35mm at the moment which is very frustrating, as it is my favourite/most used focal length. At the moment I am using the Canon 50mm f1.2, 85mm f1.2 and 135mm f2.0. I am waiting on buying a 35mm f1.4 (and finish my set) until Canon have released their long awaited 35mm MK II, but I am also very interested in the new Sigma 34mm f1.4, that sounds like a killer lens for not much money.

     The 35mm/85mm combo covered 90% of situations, but the 50mm f1.2 gives me a rock solid, “pro level” 50mm with something special, and the 135mm is getting occasional use for the times I need the extra reach.

     Hope that helps.

     Reply
6. Adi 2 March, 2013 at 5:39 am

   I sold all my zoom and prime lenses, to go with 2 prime setup 24 1.4G and 85 1.4G. I was going to go with the 35 1.4G instead of the 24, but… I don’t know… I never really got done with this thought
   I did try to heal the wound with a 40 2.0 Voigtlander and mount it on my FE.

   Reply