Between Nikon 18-55mm II and 50mm f/1.8, which suits my needs better?

Question

I am an absolute beginner in serious photography. I'm a position to get a Nikon D70 body for $100 or so.

I've been researching lenses and I'm debating if I should get the one that originally came with the camera (18-55mm II) or a 50mm f/1.8. Like I said at the beginning, I really don't know enough yet to make an informed decision.

I plan on mostly taking portrait photos. Occasionally some outdoors shots, like park outings and such, nothing too fast-moving.

I'd like to keep my budget for the lens below $150.

If you need any more details, please let me know.

Answer 1

The 50mm F/1.8 is certainly best suited for portraits. Its bright aperture lets you shoot in lower light and allows for much more background blur as seen in classic portraits, because it separates the subject from the background and tends to remove distracting elements.

Honestly, I would not use the other one for anything. Getting a poor lens is the easiest way to cripple the performance of a DSLR.

Answer 2

If you're really sure you'll mainly be doing portraits, then the 50 1.8 is a good choice. But considering your beginner status, you might find you don't like portraits and actually prefer landscapes, for example. Where the 50 1.8 is obviously limited in focal length but better quality, the 18-55 will be much more flexible.

Given that the 50 1.8 is relatively cheap, and that the 18-55 will still do a pretty good job of portraits, I'd consider getting the 18-55 with a view to getting the 50 further down the line.

Answer 3

I bought my D70s with the 18-70 kit lens. I added the 50mm f/1.8 to my bag a few days later. Aside from an occasional need for a wider angle, the 50mm stayed mounted on that camera easily 95% of the time.

When I got serious about macros, I bought a set of extension rings, and occasionally slipped a 12mm ring under the 50.

When the D70s developed some "quirks" with its CF card slot and I was ready to upgrade the body, I moved that 50mm onto a D90, where it also stays nearly permanently mounted.

The thing that really keeps the 50mm on the camera is that it works so well wide open, and when shooting wide open at a higher ISO, I can get casual shots in remarkably dim light. I've really come to enjoy its slight reach over a "normal" lens as well.

When I next buy more glass, my next lens is likely to be either a full circle fisheye or a fast prime in the 30mm range.

Answer 4

I agree with Itai's answer: for portraits, 50 mm f/1.8 is a better choice. Optical quality for this Nikon lens is incredibly good, probably the best optical quality-price ratio for the brand. And it is fairly fast, which helps to take pictures in the dark. As the D70 doesn't have a low-light sensitive sensor, this should be a huge argument in favor of the prime lens.

Besides, from my point of view, if you are a serious beginner and want to improve your skills, the choice of the prime lens really makes sense. Prime lenses force you to prepare your composition, to think where to place yourself, to carefully choose your settings and give you good habits. Zooms tend to make you lazy...

Answer 5

One home truth before I get started: $150 as a lens budget could actually mean that a dSLR is not a great choice for you, because equipping yourself with a dSLR system is expensive. While a camera body can easily be picked up in the $300-$500 range, to get a good basic system is more in the $1000-$2000 range. If $100 one way or the other is going to break the bank, you may want to consider a fixed-lens camera, instead. These days, some of them even come with APS-C sensors.

If you're seriously into photography and using a crop-body, neither of these lenses is likely to be the tool of choice for you, because they are consumer grade lenses--good, but not fantastic and there's undoubtedly a better lens out there for the specific thing you want to shoot. The problem is that as a beginner, you're caught in a chicken-and-the-egg dilemma. To know what lens you want, you need experience enough to know what lens you want.

"Body only" packages aren't really for a newb to order up their ideal system à la carte, but for someone who already has all their glass not to be lumbered with another 18-55 kit lens when they upgrade bodies.

18-55 kit lens

The reason the camera comes with a cheap, consumer-grade 18-55 lens, however, is so that you have something to shoot with out of the box, and you can get experience. It's also not a horrible terrible lens that will turn all your images butt-ugly just from being used. It is limited. It has shortcomings. There are a lot better lenses out there. But it delivers well enough that you should be able to distinguish between good and bad technique while using it. And, if bundled with the body, it's cheap.

But most importantly, its focal length range covers wide angle to short telephoto, so it's a good versatile walkaround lens that covers the typical vacation, landscape, and daylight portrait shots non-photographers buy a camera for. Learn to light, and you can do crazy good things even with an 18-55 for portrait work. And if you amass a number of photos with it you can begin to see where you like to work in terms of focal length, so you can determine the appropriate prime lenses if you want a low-cost wide-aperture lens.

50mm f/1.8 lens

The 50/1.8 used to be the kit lens on film SLRs. It's also very cheap. But unlike an 18-55, it doesn't zoom, will be a lot faster, and probably optically superior to an 18-55. It probably won't be stabilized and may not have a focus motor, if you're really bargain hunting. And to top it all off, on a crop sensor, its field of view is narrower than "normal", so its use as a general-purpose walkaround lens is far more limited.

It could be a better portrait lens than the 18-55, if you prefer doing natural light or using a thin depth of field. And you can shoot landscapes with it, albeit with a limited FoV. It's certainly nicer in terms of how wide you can open the aperture--an 18-55 lens is typically limited to f/5.6 or smaller by the time you get to 55mm. But the fixed framing can be very inconvenient, especially if you can't move around, or are shooting in tight spaces.

And here's the thing. Roughly the same amount of money could also get you a 35/1.8, and quite a bit more can get you an 85/1.8. And the 35/1.8 would be better as a walkaround, and the 85/1.8 might be better for portraits. And there you'd be, with an almost-but-not-quite-fits 50mm for your money. Chicken and the egg. To really know if the 50/1.8 is the lens you need, a little more experience is invaluable.

Answer 6

The 50mm 1:8 is a great lens. I have a couple of d810s and a d300. I fitted it out of curiosity to the d300 and was stunned at the quality of it. It would be ideal on a DX body as a portrait lens. The 18-55 is...well..."nasty" and cheap. Possibly its worst feature being the plastic (yes PLASTIC!) Lens mount! You'd be surprised how many of these mounts break in no time flat! Go with the 50 and steer well clear of that zoom!