|
|
|
|
 #36 18 Oct 2020 at 10.13pm | |   |
|
In reply to Post #35
Take some shots where the flash is the main light, if these are soft the lens may be the issue, if they're sharp it's a settings problem 
A telephoto is nice to have, and often aren't bad for macro with the right adaptor
|
|
|
|
|
#35 18 Oct 2020 at 7.19pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #34
I just find my pics aren’t quite as sharp as I’d like them. I know it’s more than likely the settings and I’m rubbish  But just thinking if it’s perfectly suited to my d3300.
I do also need another lens that can do anything kids wildlife trophy shots etc if you have any suggestions
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
#34 18 Oct 2020 at 6.50pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #32
What do you want it to do mate?
The 35 is perfect for trophy shots, you won’t get much better without spending £££.
If it’s just for general use... I find myself using my telephoto far more than anything these days. Keeps me occupied on the bank, at work and basically whenever I’m out and about
|
|
|
|
|
#33 18 Oct 2020 at 5.20pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #32
A good zoom 
Without another lens to compare, you could do a mock catch shot in the garden, then move the camera 50% further, open up to 1.8 and then crop to match framing. It won't be perfect but will give you a visual idea of the difference
|
|
|
|
|
#32 18 Oct 2020 at 5.07pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #31
Haven’t got the kit lens mate. Point taken regarding lighting, I hadn’t thought about that. What lens would you get to accompany the 35
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
#31 18 Oct 2020 at 4.56pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #30
Have you still got a kit lens to try it out?
The cost is a big difference, I don't know about sharpness or focussing speed but small differences just from the change in focal length will be
A slight difference in subject isolation(background blur)
Your camera will have to be 50% further away
A very slight difference in perspective, if you were on the same spot with the same fish and someone took pics with a 50 and a 35 with the same framing you'd notice the difference but generally most wouldnt (smaller fish, bigger ears with the 50)
Also for lighting, the extra distance will use a bit more power, while lessening the difference in brightness between you and the background (assuming your using a flash on camera)
Personally if I was to buy a second prime I'd go more than one step in focal length
Edit, I was getting mixed up with canon, the cost isn't much of a factor with nikon
|
|
|
|
|
#30 18 Oct 2020 at 4.25pm | | |
|
Would I see any benefits on my d3300 by changing from a 35mm to 50mm prime.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
#29 11 Jul 2020 at 9.42pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #9
Don’t forget about the 40mm pancake for the canon, it’s a cracking little land 😉😉
|
|
|
|
|
#28 11 Jul 2020 at 9.40pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #9
Totally agree. Used to have a canon with the nifty fifty and now got a Nikon with the 35. Much prefer the latter especially as i shoot portrait
|
|
|
|
|
#27 11 Jul 2020 at 12.29pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #24
If your at 10feet with the 50 you'll be at 7feet with the 35 for the same framing, can make a huge difference in a tight swim.
Quite a difference in look too.
The aperture range we want for catch shots is almost covered by the kit lens anyway, the primes only really give you better quality and better focussing in low light. I prefer a f2.8 zoom for fishing, DSLR versions are a bit too big tho
|
|
|
|
|
#26 11 Jul 2020 at 9.06am | | |
|
In reply to Post #24
I would say it would be a marginal difference between the two.
If you do an image search for 35mm compared to 50mm you will see what I mean by this.
50mm is a good size for trophy shots, but a lot of people prefer 35mm but as I say there's not a great difference.
The F stop is very important though.
|
|
|
|
|
#25 11 Jul 2020 at 7.33am | | |
|
|
Thanks for the help people much appreciated👍👍
|
|
|
|
|
#24 11 Jul 2020 at 7.11am | | |
|
In reply to Post #23
I have a fixed 50mm on my Nikon which blurs the background really nicely
Would a fixed 35 mm enable me to get closer too the fish ie wide angle
|
|
|
|
|
#23 10 Jul 2020 at 9.10pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2
On a full frame sensor, I'd agree on a 50mm. On a cropped, a Prime of about 28mm to 35mm seems to be the sweet spot for decent bokeh. I use a canon 28mm f/2.8 for self takes with my 90D. I've got a 32mm f/1.4 on my smaller M50 and that's very good too.
|
|
|
|
|
#22 10 Jul 2020 at 8.09pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #19
Yeah definately.
I bought a Nikon camera last Autumn and also got the 35mm Prime 1.8 lens which was recommended by people on this forum.
It's perfect for the purpose.
|
|
