1.8D or 1.8G?

MikeisEdge · Sep 18, 2011

Soooooo, I often find myself shooting low-light for sports and action shots... So I was looking into getting the 85mm f/1.8D.

I am not sure, though, whether I should get the 1.8 or 1.4. Is it worth the investment? I'm sure I'd be happy with the 1.8 but I just want some knowledge before I go buy something.

Also, on a side note... I've noticed there is a 1.8D and 1.8are types "D" and "G". What is the difference in the two types? And why would I get one over the other?

OH! I own a Nikon D60. I guess it'd be smart to mention what brand I'm looking into.

Thanks for any help,

Mike.

tron · Sep 18, 2011

EDIT: whoops i thought you were talking the 50mm lenses. why are you looking at the 85mm when the 50mm lenses are cheaper and will work just fine? do you really need that extra zoom?

there is a 1.4G and 1.4D as well as a 1.8G and 1.8D. Both of these G lenses do not have a dedicated aperture ring, the D versions do. The G lenses also have a SWM (silent wave motor) in the lens which makes focusing faster. The D versions utilize the screw drive motor in the camera body (the d40, d40x, d60, d3100, d3000, d5000, and d5100 do not have an af motor in the body so D lenses will not autofocus).

So the D lenses will not autofocus on your d60. The G lenses will however. If I were you I would go with the 50mm 1.8 Af-S lens. It will autofocus and is a pretty good deal at around $200. The 1.4 lenses are quite a bit more and I do not think you can justify the extra money for a little more aperture. The 1.8D is the cheapest (I got mine for $110) but will not autofocus on your camera.

There are a number of reviews online too, google should help you find those. Good luck!

MikeisEdge · Sep 19, 2011

Well thank you. And no I suppose the 85 isn't a necessity I just usually have my camera near that zoom when I'm shooting... But the 50mm should do me just fine. As for the Auto-focus feature... I will sometimes miss shots when I have to wait for my camera to adjust (focus). That said, I'm not entirely sure if the Auto-focus feature would be a smart idea. Do I have a manual option on the AF-S you recommended?

StringThing · Sep 19, 2011

After much research I picked up the 50mm 1.8G for my D3100 about a week ago. I had the option of trading it up within 30 days to the 1.4G but I am so impressed with it I don't think I will.

Yes, it has Auto w/manual override and manual focus.

Some shots taken with it:

Twilight on the lake.

Wild flowers

Markw · Sep 19, 2011

I think Tron covered it very well. If you go for the 50mm, definitely go with the 50/1.8G. The optics are better than the 1.8D and right up there with the 1.4G. I'm surprised that, with sports, you would want to MF. Although, I suppose that's because the tracking capability on your D60 is a little sub-par. Anyhow, you should still want the AF-s version if you can, just to make sure you can AF for those times when you want to. I would jump straight to the 80-200 F/2.8D (2-ring version) for sports, but the 50/1.8g will work great for you in darker situations. It may not be spectacular for sports, but the 35/1.8G is a superb lens as well, especially with the DX cameras, such as yours. Something to look into. It wouldn't really work for sports, but, then again, most people don't use a 50mm prime for sports, either.

Mark

ann · Sep 19, 2011

Several years ago I was thinking about this lens and was debating back and forth about 1.8 vs 1.4.

I happen to run into the Nikon Rep at a workshop and as we chatted, I ask him, which would be buy (of course he has every Nikon lens at his calling for free) and was surprised when he said the 1.8.

Destin · Sep 19, 2011

50mm prime is a standard lens with most photojournalists for high school basketball. Outside of that though, it's uses for sports are pretty limited.

The 85mm will be better for sports, but still much too short for football, or baseball, or any other outdoor field sport.

I'd second the reccomendation for a 70/80-200 2.8. I have the Sigma 70-200 2.8, which I paid $800 for brand new. I've had it for a year, and I can't complain about it a bit, other that it's s tad soft wide open at 200mm, but still useable for most people purposes.

As mentioned, a 2 touch 80-200 2.8 AF-S (Make sure it's AF-S, and not AF... they look nearly identical) can also be had for $700-900 used, and is a very solid piece of glass.

Here is an example of the quality of the sigma 70-200 2.8 EX DG HSMII, just for reference.

Taken on Saturday, with a Nikon D80 body, 160mm, F3.5, 1/1000th of a second, ISO 200:

Edit: Here's an example from a basketball game with the 50 1.8 D, Nikon D80, iso400, F2.5, 250th of a second, obviously 50mm lol

Markw · Sep 19, 2011

Agreed. The Sigma is also a great choice. Don't go with the Tamron. It's a TAD sharper than the Sigma, but is much slower in terms of AF. I have the 80-200/2.8 AF-D, and its a beautiful lens. Would I trade it to have the AF-s version? Absolutely. Would I ever really NEED to? No. It's built like a tank and is incredibly sharp. I would jump for the 70-200/2.8 AF-s VRI before I went to the 80-200/2.8 AF-s. BUT, that being said, if you're going to get a 80-200, I would also go for the AF-s if you can afford to. The torque created by the screw drive in the AF-D is pretty severe.

I also think it's going to be quite hard to find a 80-200 AF-s for $700-900. You may be able to find the AF-D for $675-900 used, but the AF-s goes for $960-1300 used. You can have the 70-200/2.8 for $1500-1700, maybe less depending where you go.

Mark

tron · Sep 19, 2011

Also OP, what kind of sports/action do you find yourself shooting that have low light? This will also help us make a few recommendations

.

And something to keep in mind when you go lens shopping: your camera has a dx sensor with a 1.5x crop factor. Therefore...

35mm will actually be 52.5mm
50mm will be 75mm
Etc

MikeisEdge · Sep 19, 2011

Markw said:
I think Tron covered it very well. If you go for the 50mm, definitely go with the 50/1.8G. The optics are better than the 1.8D and right up there with the 1.4G. I'm surprised that, with sports, you would want to MF. Although, I suppose that's because the tracking capability on your D60 is a little sub-par. Anyhow, you should still want the AF-s version if you can, just to make sure you can AF for those times when you want to. I would jump straight to the 80-200 F/2.8D (2-ring version) for sports, but the 50/1.8g will work great for you in darker situations. It may not be spectacular for sports, but the 35/1.8G is a superb lens as well, especially with the DX cameras, such as yours. Something to look into. It wouldn't really work for sports, but, then again, most people don't use a 50mm prime for sports, either.

Mark

Well, I'll definitely look into 80-200 F/2.8D. I don't have a ton of experience with lenses... I just know I shoot low-light sports a lot, and that the 50mm F/1.8G will allow me to shoot faster shutter speeds with lower ISO's... So I figured it'd be a good investment for my situation. I guess I was wrong

D-B-J · Sep 19, 2011

The 80-200 2.8D is a great, but also look at the 50mm 1.4 by sigma. From everything i read its a GREAT lens. Granted it's a little more expensive, but it's gotten so many great reviews.

MikeisEdge · Sep 19, 2011

tron said:
Also OP, what kind of sports/action do you find yourself shooting that have low light? This will also help us make a few recommendations .

And something to keep in mind when you go lens shopping: your camera has a dx sensor with a 1.5x crop factor. Therefore...

35mm will actually be 52.5mm
50mm will be 75mm
Etc

I shoot Ultimate Frisbee games (after sunset). So the only lighting is from the lights above the field. I only have my 55-200mm lens and I had to shoot wide open with an incredibly high ISO in order to get even a 1/125th shutter speed. It's not even fun to shoot with those restrictions... So, that said, I need to know something preferably under $500 that would do the job. I wish I could spend more on gear but I don't have that option right now /:

I also find myself shooting football and soccer too. All late-night games. So the issue remains the same.

djacobox372 · Sep 20, 2011

The 1.8g is actually sharper, with better contast at f2 and f1.8 then the 1.4g! This is because the newer 1.8g is the first nikon 50mm lens with an aspherical element. The only real benefit of the f1.4g is the 2 extra aperture blades which may improve bokeh when stopped down (aperture blades have no impact when shooting wide open).

BJF · Sep 24, 2011

Since you own a D60, you have to use 'G' lenses with built-in AF motor inside. Here you are some links for reference.

Nikon D60

Nikon 50mm f1.8D

Nikon 50mm f1.8G

Destin · Sep 24, 2011

BJF said:
Since you own a D60, you have to use 'G' lenses with built-in AF motor inside. Here you are some links for reference.

Nikon D60

Nikon 50mm f1.8D

Nikon 50mm f1.8G

The "g" designation has NOTHING to do with autofocus. It simply means there is no manual aperture ring. AF-S lenses are what he needs to AF on the d60.