Benefits of using 50mm portrait lens instead of 18-55mm lens with Nikon D40?

Question

I have a Nikon D40, which came with an 18-55mm lens. Someone recommended that I purchase a 50mm portrait lens. Is there any benefit to using a 50mm portrait lens, or can I achieve the same results with the 18-55 lens?

Answer 1

I would advise you not to, for the main reason, you won't be able to autofocus with the lens. For the entry level Nikon D series cameras, they require AF-S lens, and from my records, the Nikon 50mm prime lens is an AF lens, not an AF-S.

Answer 2

the 50mm is a prime lens

primes are sharper and deliver better images, it will also be faster and give more depth options (apertures like F1.8 vs 3.5-5.6)

a

Answer 3

I'd say the only advantage of the prime lens is the aperture range.  I agree with the other answerer about not being able to tell the difference in results between a prime and your zoom.

I have an 18-55 and I use it a lot.  However, it's largest aperture at 50mm is f/4.0.  My prime 50mm lens is a f/1.4, meaning I can work without a flash in a lot of situations.  

And it wasn't all that expensive a lens, maybe $250.

A prime lens also teaches you a lot about zooming with your feet rather than relying on a zoom.  But if it's not something you really need -- you don't work in low light situations a lot, etc. -- then stick with your 18-55.

Answer 4

The 50mm lens being a prime lens also helps you to take good potraits in lower light stiuations. You can use the natural light and not have to use a flash.

Answer 5

The 18-55 is an ok snapshot lense.  The 50mm is a portrait lens.  If you are doing close up head shots its great. the focal is better.

Answer 6

For practical purposes, you can achieve the same thing with an 18-55, but within limits.  

You will not have the range of f stops that you have on the 50mm, thus you limit some of your choices on how you want the photo to look.  As for the 50mm being "sharper," you will never notice the difference.  

The problem with most of those answering here is that they tend to be a little specish, look at specifications rather than results.  They can argue about those things all day, but in the end, when two photographs are produced, one from the 50mm and one from the 18-55, they will not be able to tell the difference.  Most today, however, will have software so that they can identify the specifications of the picture and then comment once they have that.  BS

What you do, then, is to purchase the lens that you want if you have the money.  If you don't have the money, stay with the 18-55 kit lens and do the best that you know how to do.  

I would not use a 50mm for portraits, it is not long enough.  If I were using a Nikon, I would look for a 70mm or a 75mm.  In 35mm, I use a 135 prime lens when I shoot portraits, but then I don't shoot many any more, so I do mylandscape shots with the kit lenses on my digital.

Answer 7

It's obvious, the 50mm f/1.8. at 50mm, which is the only focal range it can go to, the aperture can remain at an aperture of f/1.8, whereby the 18-55mm, zoomed to 55mm, you can only get an f/5.6 aperture. So, with an aperture of f/1.8 you can throw the background much more out of focus than f/5.6

And that's the obvious difference.