50/1.8 AF-D vs 50/1.8 AF-S

[Derrel]

I actually prefer my even older, pre-D 50mm AF models. I have two and use them interchangeably. I dunno...I used the 1.8 G-series early this month, and was not that happy with the lens about 1/3 out from the center--right where the FACE goes in a tall shot...at f/4.5 or f/5.6...I honestly think the lens has a focus shift issue at portrait distances compared to my old, AF lenses which I have had since the early 2000's. To be honest, the 50/1.8 G has a crappy lens hood...the damned thing comes off in regular use, at least once a day...cheap, Made in China outer bayonet fit to the shade, same with the 85/1.8 G...cheap slippery plastic on cheap slippery plastic means the hoods don't stay on the way they should.

It is possible that the 1.8 G-series design is prone to decentering or "hard knocks" like some zooms are; the design has NOT been around long enough to know for sure how it will fare over years' worth of carry and use, like say the mid-1980's design of the older 50mm AF and AF-D lenses. Overall, I have to say the new 50/1.8 G which I have had for a little over two years now is NOT really on my good list these days...it never really has resonated with me. I bought it thinking it'd be a big step up, but honestly, I PREFER the older designed lens in basically, every single way. The 58mm filter/lens cap size is truly WTF!? and the oversized, crappy lens hood are the big operational PITA's with the 50/G, but the optics in mine are just....meh... it's not "all that"...in fact, I think mine's developed a problem after pretty limited, careful, babying use over just two years!

 

[hamlet]

Consider some third party lenses. I'm going to sell my nikon 50 1.4g and buy the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art when i go full frame.

Why would you make that change?
if you are going to be giving away the 1.4 I'll take it

I like it mainly because the corners are much sharper for full frame. Sigmas art lenses are pretty incredible.

 

[PaulWog]

I actually prefer my even older, pre-D 50mm AF models. I have two and use them interchangeably. I dunno...I used the 1.8 G-series early this month, and was not that happy with the lens about 1/3 out from the center--right where the FACE goes in a tall shot...at f/4.5 or f/5.6...I honestly think the lens has a focus shift issue at portrait distances compared to my old, AF lenses which I have had since the early 2000's. To be honest, the 50/1.8 G has a crappy lens hood...the damned thing comes off in regular use, at least once a day...cheap, Made in China outer bayonet fit to the shade, same with the 85/1.8 G...cheap slippery plastic on cheap slippery plastic means the hoods don't stay on the way they should.

It is possible that the 1.8 G-series design is prone to decentering or "hard knocks" like some zooms are; the design has NOT been around long enough to know for sure how it will fare over years' worth of carry and use, like say the mid-1980's design of the older 50mm AF and AF-D lenses. Overall, I have to say the new 50/1.8 G which I have had for a little over two years now is NOT really on my good list these days...it never really has resonated with me. I bought it thinking it'd be a big step up, but honestly, I PREFER the older designed lens in basically, every single way. The 58mm filter/lens cap size is truly WTF!? and the oversized, crappy lens hood are the big operational PITA's with the 50/G, but the optics in mine are just....meh... it's not "all that"...in fact, I think mine's developed a problem after pretty limited, careful, babying use over just two years!

Did all of these problems develop over time? I have experienced none of this. My lens hoods stay on perfectly tight, and my 50 1.8G's performance is excellent across the frame. But, I haven't had the lenses too long.

 

[sonicbuffalo]

Derrel....you can stop being Mr. Raincloud now. We know the 50 f/1.8 G is a terrific lens for the price.

 

[Derrel]

Did all of these problems develop over time? I have experienced none of this. My lens hoods stay on perfectly tight, and my 50 1.8G's performance is excellent across the frame. But, I haven't had the lenses too long.

No, the lens hood falls off all the damned time. Same on the 85/1.8 G. Really shoddy fit on both. Been that way since Day One on both lenses. I bought them both from a sales associate (who happens to be aTPF forum member!) who works at the largest camera store here in this area, in early 2012, on the same day. I am not overly impressed with the 50mm 1.8 G-series lens. I do not consider it a "terrific" lens...like most Nikon 50mm 1.8 lenses made since the 1970's, it is an adequate performer, but it's not remarkable and it's not "streets ahead" of any of my older 50mm lenses. I really thought it would be markedly better than it is. What I mean is, a lens like the 60mm Micro~!NIKKOR makes images you see and go Wow! Same with the new 85/1.8 G series...you look at its output and go "wow!". No so with the 50...it's adequate. On the pro Nikon bodies D2x and D3x, the focus speed is no better than that of my 20+ year-old 50 AF models...and the lens seems to have NOTABLE focus shift when stopped down, so on careful, tripod-mounted work after dark at f/8, the lens needs to be focused STOPPED DOWN to shooting aperture.

But the troubling thing to me is that two years in, and I'm shooting at f/4.5 in summer conditions and I see sub-par image characteristics on my sample in portraits shot at 1/1000 second in summer sunlight...I am thinking this lens construction might not stand up over time. I knew about the focus shift from trusted reviews, before I bought the lens, but I assumed they were exaggerating the issue. They are not.

Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G (FX) - Review / Test Report

They give it 3.5 stars for optical quality. I would agree with that, it's a three and a half star lens performance-wise...it's NOT a 4- or 5-star optic, but then it's a $200 prime lens. It's not in the same class as the Sigma 50/1.4 ART is, for example, but that's a $900 class lens, so... I think my OLD 50mm 1.4 Ai at f/8 is actually SHARPER. I dunno...I'm just saying, I thought this was going to be a stellar lens, like its 85mm 1.8 stable-mate, but it's not in the same class.

 

[PaulWog]

Did all of these problems develop over time? I have experienced none of this. My lens hoods stay on perfectly tight, and my 50 1.8G's performance is excellent across the frame. But, I haven't had the lenses too long.

No, the lens hood falls off all the damned time. Same on the 85/1.8 G. Really shoddy fit on both. Been that way since Day One on both lenses. I bought them both from a sales associate (who happens to be aTPF forum member!) who works at the largest camera store here in this area, in early 2012, on the same day. I am not overly impressed with the 50mm 1.8 G-series lens. I do not consider it a "terrific" lens...like most Nikon 50mm 1.8 lenses made since the 1970's, it is an adequate performer, but it's not remarkable and it's not "streets ahead" of any of my older 50mm lenses. I really thought it would be markedly better than it is. What I mean is, a lens like the 60mm Micro~!NIKKOR makes images you see and go Wow! Same with the new 85/1.8 G series...you look at its output and go "wow!". No so with the 50...it's adequate. On the pro Nikon bodies D2x and D3x, the focus speed is no better than that of my 20+ year-old 50 AF models...and the lens seems to have NOTABLE focus shift when stopped down, so on careful, tripod-mounted work after dark at f/8, the lens needs to be focused STOPPED DOWN to shooting aperture.

But the troubling thing to me is that two years in, and I'm shooting at f/4.5 in summer conditions and I see sub-par image characteristics on my sample in portraits shot at 1/1000 second in summer sunlight...I am thinking this lens construction might not stand up over time. I knew about the focus shift from trusted reviews, before I bought the lens, but I assumed they were exaggerating the issue. They are not.

Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G (FX) - Review / Test Report

They give it 3.5 stars for optical quality. I would agree with that, it's a three and a half star lens performance-wise...it's NOT a 4- or 5-star optic, but then it's a $200 prime lens. It's not in the same class as the Sigma 50/1.4 ART is, for example, but that's a $900 class lens, so... I think my OLD 50mm 1.4 Ai at f/8 is actually SHARPER. I dunno...I'm just saying, I thought this was going to be a stellar lens, like its 85mm 1.8 stable-mate, but it's not in the same class.

I've felt like it has been great at all apertures, and has been bang on for focus so often that any misfocusing has likely been my fault. Maybe my copy is just really good? The quality of my 50 1.8G is almost bang on with the 85 1.8G. I'd say the 50mm 1.8G offers 80-90% the performance that the 85mm 1.8G offers, at least my copy does (focus is off on the first shot, my fault):

All of the examples are at f1.8 though... except for the silhouette one.

 

[Derrel]

It's no way even close to the 85mm G. It's a couple of classes below that. Here's what I mean:

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/03/13/dxomark-best-lenses-for-the-nikon-d800-camera.aspx/

IN JUST the 50mm category, and in JUST the 85-105mm category there are a DOZEN better lenses out of 19 total tested...including the older 50mm f/1.4 AF-D Nikkor. This short sample excludes many other lenses in the 135mm to 400mm categories.

Yes, it's an okay lens...it's just a little bit worse (one single DxO Mark point lower) than the basically, 30-year-old 50mm f/1.4 AF-D design. I don't think it is as good as my 30+ year old 50mm f/1.4 Ai...

In this day of zooms, most primes appear pretty good if that's one's basis for comparison. Look up the 70-300 VR-G's DxO Mark score, and you'll see why you're raving about your 50...which is, as I said, about the SAME as the old 50mm lenses I've been shooting since the 1980's...I expected a MARKED improvement, but it's...not, from my point of view. Yes, good. Good for a $200 lens. Good compared to a zoom. But, again...NOT as good as a Reagan-era designed 50mm f/1.4 Nikon autofocus lens...and slower to focus as well....and with a big, oddball filter size and a huge lens hood. It makes your 50mm with hood draw attention, so it LOOKs like a 'big lens' to non camera people.

Nikon ruined the 50mm with this thing. It's huge for what it is, for no good reason whatsoever. If you want people to look at you and your camera and lens, then the new 50mm makes sense as an attention-getter. I want a 50 that 'disappears' on the camera; this thing does the exact opposite. If it had KICK-ASS optics, I'd be tempted to use it. Instead, I leave in at home, and use one of two older,smaller lenses that actually go with the polarizers and lens caps and the carry pouches I use for my normal, every weekend, 24 and 35 and 50mm lens prime trio...this new 50mm design is just too big in all ways for what it brings with it. Why the heck it's a 58 filter with a massive external-fit hood is beyond any logical explanation, except to lure customers who WANT a deliberately over-sized lens. It's a polarizer nightmare...it does NOT integrate with ANYTHING else a guy would logically carry!!! 58mm is an asinine filter choice! Even 62mm would make more sense! 67mm would have made a LOT of sense from a total system/carry/use POV for serious users, and would have allowed them to make it deliberately big and superbly well-corrected, a la the new Sigma 50 ART...or even the prior Sigma 50/1.4, but they went oddball on us...

The thing is just a pain in the ass if you want to shoot other Nikon lenses and use filters or have a small set of three lens caps and a small carry system...there was absolutely NO need whatsoever to make this a 58mm filter thread lens. None. Zero. Go 62--like a LOT of the other Nikon system, or stay 52mm, or go all the way to 67 and make it integrate with the 16-35 4/VR-G and the 70-300 VR-G and the 70-200/4 VR.

 

[astroNikon]

Consider some third party lenses. I'm going to sell my nikon 50 1.4g and buy the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art when i go full frame.

Why would you make that change?
if you are going to be giving away the 1.4 I'll take it

I like it mainly because the corners are much sharper for full frame. Sigmas art lenses are pretty incredible.

But I see no value for me in a $900 50mm lens. My use for a 50mm lens is just a portrait lens on my crop "just in case"

I see the value in a $900 85mm/1.4D and a 28-70/2.8 lens though.

 

[astroNikon]

So Derrel,
I'm getting the hint that you are saying for me to hold on to my 50/1.8D for a bit longer for a better comparison to the 50/1.8G ?

 

[hamlet]

Why would you make that change?
if you are going to be giving away the 1.4 I'll take it

I like it mainly because the corners are much sharper for full frame. Sigmas art lenses are pretty incredible.

But I see no value for me in a $900 50mm lens. My use for a 50mm lens is just a portrait lens on my crop "just in case"

I see the value in a $900 85mm/1.4D and a 28-70/2.8 lens though.

$900 is a bit much. But to me the sigma 50mm 1.4 art fits exactly in between the nikon 50 1.4g and the 58 1.4g. It is the middle of the road kind of lens.

 

[480sparky]

Why not just get both the G and the D? Then, like me, you can add the E..........

 

[D-B-J]

I bought the G and found it an upgrade. I like it for what it is ($200 lens).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hamlet]

I bought the G and found it an upgrade. I like it for what it is ($200 lens).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is how i look at it too. $200 is not really a whole lot of money, so i'm not sure what you expect for that? To put it in perspective: $200 now is $70 for people who lived during the 80s.

 

[greybeard]

As a backup incase the AF motor on the AF-S fails.

 

[astroNikon]

At this very moment I actually have the D (which I've had for a while) and just picked up a G.
The G is a large lens in comparison to the D for sure. I like the smaller compact lens but then I'm also think back to the old days of pre-focusing lenses. But If I look at the other lenses I use primarily like the 80-200/2.8 or my new 70-300 VR, then it still is small.

Lenses grew quite a bit when the internal focus motors were introduced, even if the optics were similar in overall size. Then as they add more technology (VR) to the lenses they grow in size even more.

I like the MF override of the G. So for now I'm keeping both considering it's not much money.
I do have a very nice B+W MRC slimline CPOL for the D, which I used primarily when I owned a 24/2.8D (same filter size).

My next focus is primarily on 85mm. My only other prime.