Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Recommendations For 50mm Nikkor  
User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5230 times:

Hiya all,
Planning to buy a Nikkor prime, 50mm in particular. I'm thinking of buying the AF-S 50mm f/1.8G, will that be a good choice? Is it worth it to upgrade to the f/1.4G version?

Thanks

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineiamlucky13 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5220 times:

Do you need the slightly wider aperture (either for low light or for the shallow depth of field it provides) of the 1.4G?

If not, then I'd lean towards the F/1.8 just for the cost savings. If you do need to maximize low-light capability, and the extra $250 or so isn't an issue, then it's an easy choice.

They're both a bit soft wide open, but very good by F/2.8, and great past F/4. SLRGear.com's tests show the F/1.4G as a little bit sharper at a given aperture setting than the F/1.8G


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5185 times:

Quoting egondo (Thread starter):
Planning to buy a Nikkor prime, 50mm in particular.

Are you using DX or FX bodies?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5174 times:

Thanks for your input iamlucky13...
Tony, I'm using a DX body, D5000 inparticular


User currently offlineDarreno1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 224 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5170 times:

I was about to tell you to consider the very inexpensive AF 50mm 1.8D, but you will need a built-in focus motor to AF. Like mentioned already unless low-light performance is a really big priority, the f1.8 will be more than sufficient. The 50mm old and new, G or D all seem to be excellent performers at an affordable price.

If you don't already have the AF-S 35mm 1.8G, it would also be a great addition to your collection.

[Edited 2013-03-29 23:51:54]


Nikon D7000 / Nikkor 105mm AF f2.8 / Nikkor 35 f1.8G / Nikkor 50 f1.8D / Nikkor 85mm / Nikkor 300mm f4 AF
User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5146 times:

Quoting Darreno1 (Reply 4):
I was about to tell you to consider the very inexpensive AF 50mm 1.8D, but you will need a built-in focus motor to AF. Like mentioned already unless low-light performance is a really big priority, the f1.8 will be more than sufficient. The 50mm old and new, G or D all seem to be excellent performers at an affordable price.

If you don't already have the AF-S 35mm 1.8G, it would also be a great addition to your collection.

Thanks for your input Darren, appreciate them. The 35mm f/1.8G is a DX lens, and I could have a hard time when upgrading my D5000 to the FX bodies in the future.


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5141 times:

Quoting egondo (Reply 3):
Tony, I'm using a DX body, D5000 inparticular

The 50mm 1.8G is a great lens for the price. However, it works more like a short-tele on a DX body instead of a "normal" lens. So, if you're OK with that, go for it (I love the 85mm 1.8G on my D700 which will be a similar focal length to a 50mm lens on a DX body; I strongly prefer 85mm in fact to the 50mm focal length).

If you really want something a bit wider, as Darren said, you have to go for the 35mm 1.8G (which again is a great lens for the price).

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5102 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 6):
The 50mm 1.8G is a great lens for the price. However, it works more like a short-tele on a DX body instead of a "normal" lens. So, if you're OK with that, go for it (I love the 85mm 1.8G on my D700 which will be a similar focal length to a 50mm lens on a DX body; I strongly prefer 85mm in fact to the 50mm focal length).

Thanks for your input, I think I'll visit my dealer to try the lens firsthand. A tele-like feel I think did not really bother me.


User currently offlinemegatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5083 times:

If you're concerned about being able to use the lens on an FX body and want somewhere in the vicinity of 50mm field of view NOW, you could look at the new 28mm f/1.8 AF-S. It would give you a 42mm field of view. Be aware however that the lens would become a true wide angle perspective when it got mounted to an FX body.

Of course, you could get the 35mm f/1.4 with similar results, but I get the impression you don't want to spend that much money


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5061 times:

Quoting egondo (Reply 7):
Thanks for your input, I think I'll visit my dealer to try the lens firsthand. A tele-like feel I think did not really bother me.

Do you have a kit lens or something else that covers 35mm to 50mm? You can always set it to 35mm, 50mm, etc. and see how taking pictures at that focal length works out for you. Alternatively, look at the pictures you've taken and see what focal lengths you tend to use (it's an easy query to set up in say Lightroom). This should give you a good idea on whether you'll like a particular focal length.

Quoting megatop412 (Reply 8):
Of course, you could get the 35mm f/1.4 with similar results, but I get the impression you don't want to spend that much money

(apologies for maybe derailing the thread a little bit here....)

I've been drooling about the Nikon 35mm 1.4 for a while now! Unfortunately, it's just too expensive and I don't think I'll use it enough to justify its high price. Note that recently Sigma released their 35mm 1.4 and all reviews I've read claim that it is simply superb. It's "cheaper" than the Nikon 1.4 but not really "cheap". If you don't mind getting a third-party lens, you should consider the Sigma. Here's the photozone review on FX:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/792-sigma3514dgfx

and here it is on DX (hot off the press too!):

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikko...aps-c-lens-tests/793-sigma3514dgdx

I really hope that the new Sigma is going to encourage Nikon to actually release a 35mm f/1.8-f/2 for FX as that's the prime that I really want (they've upgraded all the others, that's the last one remaining I think).

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlinemegatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5044 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 9):
I really hope that the new Sigma is going to encourage Nikon to actually release a 35mm f/1.8-f/2 for FX as that's the prime that I really want (they've upgraded all the others, that's the last one remaining I think).

I'm not sure they'll release a 35mm f/1.8 FX now that the 28mm is available, that just seems too close together. After much agonizing I decided to take advantage of the lens rebates that end in 40 minutes and spring for the 28mm. Can't wait to get that thing onto my D700. Had to talk myself out of the 70-200mm f/2.8 regardless of the price reduction, that just ain't gonna happen lol


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5025 times:

Quoting megatop412 (Reply 10):
I'm not sure they'll release a 35mm f/1.8 FX now that the 28mm is available, that just seems too close together.

Actually, I would be surprised if they don't do it. In the 1.4 prime range they have modern 24, 35, 50, and 85 and they recently released modern 28, 50, and 85 in the 1.8 range. The only gap that remains is a low-end 35 FX. I doubt they will do an 1.8 given that it will create confusion with the 35mm DX. So, maybe they'll end up making it an f/2 (and directly replace their current 35mm f/2 D). They can differentiate it further by adding VR (what Canon did for their 35mm f/2 IS). Note that 35mm is a classic street shooter's focal length and the Sony RX-1, Fuji 100/100s, Leica X1/X2, etc. all have 35mm or equivalent. So I strongly believe that there will be strong demand for it.

Quoting megatop412 (Reply 10):
After much agonizing I decided to take advantage of the lens rebates that end in 40 minutes and spring for the 28mm.

Let us know how it is! I got the 85mm 1.8 with the rebates and I'm very happy with it.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5018 times:

Thanks for the info guys!

Quoting SNATH (Reply 11):
They can differentiate it further by adding VR

So, the 50mm doesn't have VR too?


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5015 times:

Quoting egondo (Reply 12):
So, the 50mm doesn't have VR too?

None of the Nikon primes I mentioned have VR (and that includes the Sigma 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm 1.4 primes).

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineiamlucky13 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5001 times:

It seems worth mentioning that a lot of people with full frame Nikon's actually do use the 35mm F/1.8G. They get a little bit of corner vignetting, but not as much as other DX lenses produce on FX, and useable in a lot of situations.

The third post here has some examples:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/afsnikk...r35mm18/discuss/72157629854519077/

As you can see, if you can settle for the crop modes when using it on FX, it does just fine.

Both 35mm and 50mm can be quite useful on a DX camera, but they're different enough it's worth trying out each to figure out which focal length will be more useful to you.

Of course, you can test that much with your kit zoom. Just set it to 35mm and go for a walk around and see what pictures you can take without touching the zoom ring. Then set it to 50mm and do the same thing. Don't be afraid to "zoom" in or out with your feet when practical.


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4988 times:

Quoting iamlucky13 (Reply 14):
It seems worth mentioning that a lot of people with full frame Nikon's actually do use the 35mm F/1.8G. They get a little bit of corner vignetting, but not as much as other DX lenses produce on FX, and useable in a lot of situations.

I got a 35mm 1.8G a year ago to give as a gift and I tried it on my D700 to make sure it worked correctly (no decentering issues, etc.). It worked better than expected and the center was certainly very good. However, the corners were way too blurry for my taste. If I wanted an effect like that, I'd use my lensbaby.  
Quoting iamlucky13 (Reply 14):
As you can see, if you can settle for the crop modes when using it on FX, it does just fine.

Maybe it's just me but I never saw the point of the crop modes. Seriously, why would I spend $3,000 on a D800 and shoot it in crop mode which will give IQ similar to the D7000 given that I can get a D7000 for about 1/3 of the price?

Quoting iamlucky13 (Reply 14):

Both 35mm and 50mm can be quite useful on a DX camera, but they're different enough it's worth trying out each to figure out which focal length will be more useful to you.

Of course, you can test that much with your kit zoom. Just set it to 35mm and go for a walk around and see what pictures you can take without touching the zoom ring. Then set it to 50mm and do the same thing. Don't be afraid to "zoom" in or out with your feet when practical.

+1 to all of this!

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineiamlucky13 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 15):
Maybe it's just me but I never saw the point of the crop modes. Seriously, why would I spend $3,000 on a D800 and shoot it in crop mode which will give IQ similar to the D7000 given that I can get a D7000 for about 1/3 of the price?

I don't really think the crop mode is a particularly important feature, but if you buy an FX body, but already have a DX lens and it provides a useful focal length for you, why not continue to use it? It doesn't really matter if you crop when you shoot or when you post-process, although the viewfinder masking does help you use it more accurately.

And more in line with the OP's interest, I don't see much reason to avoid buying a DX lens he knows he can make use of now simply because he might in the future buy an FX body, all the more so since the DX lens does not cease to be useful if he does buy FX down the line.


User currently offlineegondo From Indonesia, joined Dec 2011, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4922 times:

Quoting iamlucky13 (Reply 16):
And more in line with the OP's interest, I don't see much reason to avoid buying a DX lens he knows he can make use of now simply because he might in the future buy an FX body, all the more so since the DX lens does not cease to be useful if he does buy FX down the line.

Made a lot of sense   .

I know it's out of topic, but I think I'll start considering the 35mm f/1.8, and compare it to the 50mm f/1.8G


User currently offlinemegatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4910 times:

Quoting iamlucky13 (Reply 16):
I don't see much reason to avoid buying a DX lens he knows he can make use of now simply because he might in the future buy an FX body, all the more so since the DX lens does not cease to be useful if he does buy FX down the line.

Amen to that. My DX travel kit is the 12-24mm f/4 DX, 35mm f/1.8 DX, and the 55-200mm VR DX. I didn't stop using the 35mm when I got my D700. Love that lens. Although I did my own test and was unhappy with the vignetting on the 700. Like Tony said, I see no point to using the DX crop mode(especially on the D700).


User currently offlineandrej From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1009 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4892 times:

I believe that 50 mm f/1.8G is probably the best lens for the money. I have met many photographers that agree with me (as well as comments above).   If you do not need extra aperture, f/1.8 will do great.

IMHO, it should be mandatory for any Nikon user. 


User currently offlinemegatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4873 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 11):
Let us know how it is! I got the 85mm 1.8 with the rebates and I'm very happy with it.

Just got the 28mm f/1.8 and fired off a few shots. I'll have to check out the sharpness when I have more time, but the subject isolation alone is worth the cost, given the price of the 24mm f/1.4 alternative.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4838 times:

Honestly the 50 1.4G really isn't worth it over the 1.8G. I was going to buy the 1.8G in 2011 and I happened to mention it to my dad and he said don't buy, I'll get it for you for Christmas. When I opened my box from B&H low and behold it was the 1.4 instead of the 1.8.

Unfortunately the 1.4 doesn't have nanocoating or VR or anything really special over the 1.8, just a wider aperture and twice the price. It needs to be stopped down to 2.8 to really get it sharp anyway (although it is usable from f/2 on imo) so why not save some money and get the 1.8G instead?

If I was buying today I'd get both the 35 1.8G and the 85 1.8G and skip the 50mm focal length altogether. On DX bodies (D200 & D5100) the 35 is more practical indoors while the 85 is a better portrait lens.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4837 times:

Sharpest aperture on the 1.4G is f/5.6-f/8, although f/4 is almost as sharp. Don't use it at f/1.4 unless you want a soft, dreamy look. I'd show you an example but I'd have to go hunt through my exif data to find one actually shot at 1.4.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Recommendations For A Recovery Software posted Sat Apr 21 2012 13:07:37 by whisperjet
Recommendations For A Small Camera posted Thu Mar 13 2008 10:23:50 by NQYGuy
Seeking Recommendations For Digital Camcorder posted Tue Nov 14 2006 17:57:59 by Jakbar
Camera Recommendations For A Beginnner posted Sun Apr 16 2006 09:10:29 by Flyf15
What Shutter Speed For 50mm Rampshots? posted Thu Apr 3 2003 23:51:05 by LH526
Need Recommendations For A Flatbed posted Sat Aug 17 2002 04:16:39 by Tu154m
50mm Prime For Spotting? posted Mon Aug 1 2011 15:30:31 by benrotem
What's Best For My Money: Nikkor 70-300 Or 80-400? posted Wed Jan 21 2009 13:32:33 by FLY2HMO
Canon 50mm F1.8 II Any Good For Av Photography? posted Wed Sep 26 2007 03:59:28 by Deaphen
Max CF For 10D And Brand/speed Recommendations? posted Fri Mar 11 2005 16:43:59 by Manzoori