35mm v 50mm

A

ampsonic

Active member
Hello All,

I've got a Nikon 50mm 1.8 lens I use on my GH1. I'm worried for some run and gun available light stuff that this will be too tight, and that the kit lens won't be fast enough.

I'd really like the Panasonic 20mm 1.7, but it's currently out of stock with panasonic (where I get a $100 discount).

I'm considering picking up a 35mm 1.8 nikon, to get me something wider (which I would also use with my Nikon still camera), but I don't have a good sense of just how much wider that would be on the GH1, compared to the 50mm. Worth it? (it's about 200 bucks).

Thanks!

Nick
 
the difference should be equal to zooming in with the kit lens at 100mm (50mm equivalent) and 70mm (35mm equivalent). you probably won't feel like its a $200 difference though and will want to hold out for the 20mm.
remember to factor in the m4/3 2X crop factor when considering full frame lenses and comparing them to m4/3 lenses.
that 35mm nikon is like a 70mm m4/3 lens. 70mm vs 20mm is a huge difference.
 
averan, I'm pretty sure that is incorrect. I think all lenses are rated at their actual length. So far instance the kit lens zoomed all the way out would give you the same field of view as a 14mm lens made for an old film still camera. In other words a 50mm lens is always a 50mm lens.

If you can afford both, get the 35mm Nikon and get the 20mm later. 50mm is a little long for interview shots, and the 20mm can be wide or give a wide angle lens look. 35mm would be nice to have.
 
nope.
a 50mm canon FD on the gh1 will give you the equivalent field of view of a 100mm canon FD on a full-frame sensor cam like the 5D. there's about a million posts in this forum about the m4/3 2X crop factor on the gh1 and the 1.6X crop factor of the canon aps-c size sensors like in the T2i when using full-frame lenses. better check your sources. ;)
 
The clincher is that the 20mm Lumix lens has a FoV of 40mm on the Gh1, just like all other lenses, it is a 20mm lens, affected by the 2.0x crop factor. So you are both right, and both wrong.
 
I get that. But where I disagree is the part where you tell the poster to zoom in the kit lens to 70mm to get a sense of what a 35mm lens would look like ON A GH1. I put that in caps to make a point and make sure I understand what you're saying. The kit lens zoomed in to 50mm on the GH1 would look the same as a 50mm Nikkor-S lens on a GH1 (FOV wise). In both cases the field of view would be the same as putting a 100mm lens on a full frame camera like a 5D or an old F1.
 
lol!
well that sucks....i thought the m4/3 lenses had no crop factor on an m4/3 camera.
seems a little counterintuitive to me that a m4/3 lens would be measured as a 35mm.
but i can see how it would make sense if you want to be able to compare across cameras...you'd need a standard measure.
 
Last edited:
Believe me, I understand. This was crazy confusing to me, too, and I still have to think it through sometimes. But like you say, it's probably best that there is a standard across lenses...or this would be even MORE confusing. Harha!
 
Crop factor, just like cellulites, is just a moronic marketing term. Knowing what field of view is yielded with a given focal length and sensor / negative size is part of a cinematographer's skill set - or a photographer's for that matter. 35 mm still photography - aka 135 format - is not and has never been a golden standard that all other formats bow to. Just ask any Hasselblad owner. Or the IMAX corporation.
 
"Tamron Focal Length Tool"

"Tamron Focal Length Tool"

Have you tried this tool?

1. Google "Tamron Focal Length Tool" or click here.

2. Then make sure to select the 35mm Film icon, not the Digital one.

3. Adjust the slider to 2x the focal length of the lens you are considering. So in this case compare 70-100mm (35-50mm).
 
If you're going for the Nikon 35mm, (I know you already bought the 20mm but hypothetically speaking) an f1.8 for $200 may be too pricey. I bought a used Nikon 35mm f2.0 for about $89. It was cosmetically a little beat up but everything works and the images look great. At only 1/2 stop slower than the f1.8, I'd say look for that kind of bargain.
 
Just to make clear, the new 35 nikon (which sells for $200) will not work. One needs an aperture ring and the new G lenses don't have them.
 
The 30mm f/1.4 Sigma also lacks a aperture ring, so best opt for the 4/3s version with a m4/3 adapter. That said I love my old 35mm f/2.0 Canon FDs - yup, got two of them babies, one with lens gear mounted for my follow focus, one without for street photography style shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top