35mm or 50mm as a prime lens for the Nikon Z system?

[Skye.prf]

I already have the 14-30 F4, waiting for the next 24-105 F4 expecting that this ens will be as good as the 24-70 F4. So, I am looking for a low light lens... street photo, inside, people, etc... A 50 mm F1,8 or the 35mm F1,8??? How will be the distortion if a crop the 35mm to match a 50mm? I do not want the 24-70 F2.8 (weight, size, price). it will be on the Z7ii

 

[DRwyoming]

A 50 mm F1,8 or the 35mm F1,8???

Either of those would be good low light choices

How will be the distortion if a crop the 35mm to match a 50mm?

If you're talking about perspective distortion that a lot of folks associate with wide angle lenses, that's really a function of how close you get to your subjects and not the focal length of the lens. IOW, a 14mm lens doesn't cause facial features to be distorted, getting crazy close to your subject and then using a 14mm lens to frame the scene is what causes that apparent distortion. From that standpoint, if you'll use a 35mm lens with loose framing and a crop (either in camera or in post) to achieve the field of view of a 50mm lens and work from distances appropriate for that 50mm FoV you won't get distorted facial features or other things that photographers often refer to as distortion associated with wide angle lenses.

FWIW, the concept that facial feature distortion is really a function of working distance is very easy to demonstrate. Stand at a normal viewing distance from a mirror and notice normal facial features. Then move in until you're nearly touching the mirror with your nose and see the resulting clown like perspective distortion, it's easier to see if you close one eye. That distortion in facial features comes from the crazy close distances and how the relative distance between things like the tip of the nose and the eyes is very large when you're so close and those relative distances are nearly the same when working from more typical viewing distances. The choice of lens focal length doesn't create that effect, it's a matter of working distance where the wide lens only allows a sufficiently wide angle of view when working from those super close distances.

Actual lens distortion like pincushion, barrel, mustache and the like are a function of the lens design and quality but most of those are substantially reduced when you crop to less than a full frame view and generally are very well controlled to start with in a lens as long as 35mm especially the newer lenses in native Z mount.

 

[Steve W]

I prefer the 50mm myself. Nicer perspective than the 35mm. I prefer the 50 for doing pano’s too for that reason. 35mm is usually either too short or too long for me. I have a 16-35 and it’s normally used at 18mm - 20mm. The 50mm fills the middle and the 70-200 is the next commonly used range.
It might be worth reviewing a good cross section of your photos to see what range/s you most commonly use. That’s why I don’t own a 24-70 as the 50mm f/1.8 fills the gap. Compact and lightweight.