Nikkor 50mm 1.8D or 1.4D???

[gryffinwings]

So I'm getting a Nikon D200 soon, so I've been thinking about adding a 50mm, not sure which to get, 1.8D or 1.4D, is the 1.4D worth the extra cash?

 

[480sparky]

If you're not shooting low-light scenes on a regular basis, the 1.4 would be kind of a waste.

 

[orb9220]

Yep wouldn't waste the extra cash for the f1.4 but that is my personal choice. For the price can get the 35mm f1.8G & 50mm f1.8G or AF-D version for same price and consider myself ahead of the game. And would consider the newer 50mm f1.8G over the 50mm f1.8 AF-D. For a little bit more suppose to be sharper with better pleasing bokeh.
.

 

[gryffinwings]

Yep wouldn't waste the extra cash for the f1.4 but that is my personal choice. For the price can get the 35mm f1.8G & 50mm f1.8G or AF-D version for same price and consider myself ahead of the game. And would consider the newer 50mm f1.8G over the 50mm f1.8 AF-D. For a little bit more suppose to be sharper with better pleasing bokeh.
.

I'm considering the 1.8d model because I've heard it has little to no distortion, and I've heard the newer 1.8g has a bit more distortion, not to mention the 1.8d is pretty darn cheap. I've also already have the 35mm lens, so I'm good there.

I'm specifically looking at getting this lens for my D200 that I should be getting delivered next week or the week after, considering the low light capability isn't the greatest, it's my excuse to get better lens.

 

[Mach0]

I'm considering the 1.8d model because I've heard it has little to no distortion, and I've heard the newer 1.8g has a bit more distortion, not to mention the 1.8d is pretty darn cheap. I've also already have the 35mm lens, so I'm good there.

I'm specifically looking at getting this lens for my D200 that I should be getting delivered next week or the week after, considering the low light capability isn't the greatest, it's my excuse to get better lens.

The distortion can be corrected. It's optics are pretty good. The d version is good too. The only reason I really got the g was the flare was much better controlled.

 

[gryffinwings]

I'm considering the 1.8d model because I've heard it has little to no distortion, and I've heard the newer 1.8g has a bit more distortion, not to mention the 1.8d is pretty darn cheap. I've also already have the 35mm lens, so I'm good there.

I'm specifically looking at getting this lens for my D200 that I should be getting delivered next week or the week after, considering the low light capability isn't the greatest, it's my excuse to get better lens.

The distortion can be corrected. It's optics are pretty good. The d version is good too. The only reason I really got the g was the flare was much better controlled.

What kind of circumstance will I run into flare? very bright sunlight right? This isn't the kind of lens I will be using when it's very bright, I'd need this in lower light situations, I have other lens that most likely control flare better, look at my equipment list.

 

[Mach0]

What kind of circumstance will I run into flare? very bright sunlight right? This isn't the kind of lens I will be using when it's very bright, I'd need this in lower light situations, I have other lens that most likely control flare better, look at my equipment list.

Just keep it away from facing the light source.

 

[480sparky]

What kind of circumstance will I run into flare? ......

Any time a light source is falling directly onto the front element of the lens (or is reflected off a mirror-like surface) can cause flare.

You can mitigate it by both being aware of the spatial relationship between the two, and using a hood........ and not using a filter.

 

[trizzo]

In my oponion, I would earn more cash and go for the f/1.4 version. Difference between the f/1.8 (especially AF-D) and f/1.4 is huge.

 

[480sparky]

In my oponion, I would earn more cash and go for the f/1.4 version. Difference between the f/1.8 (especially AF-D) and f/1.4 is huge.

Please quantify this huge difference.

 

[panblue]

So I'm getting a Nikon D200 soon, so I've been thinking about adding a 50mm, not sure which to get, 1.8D or 1.4D, is the 1.4D worth the extra cash?

I doubt there's much real difference. Be good to see SOOCs that demonstrate a real difference. D200 isn't one of the lastest, high ISO performers but all the same, we're only talking half a stop more light..a bit shallower DOF c/w a f1.8.

I bet they perform practically the same at ~2.8.

 

[kenwood72]

Yep wouldn't waste the extra cash for the f1.4 but that is my personal choice. For the price can get the 35mm f1.8G & 50mm f1.8G or AF-D version for same price and consider myself ahead of the game. And would consider the newer 50mm f1.8G over the 50mm f1.8 AF-D. For a little bit more suppose to be sharper with better pleasing bokeh.
.

I'm considering the 1.8d model because I've heard it has little to no distortion, and I've heard the newer 1.8g has a bit more distortion, not to mention the 1.8d is pretty darn cheap. I've also already have the 35mm lens, so I'm good there.

I'm specifically looking at getting this lens for my D200 that I should be getting delivered next week or the week after, considering the low light capability isn't the greatest, it's my excuse to get better lens.

you seem to be quoting what I just read from the ken rockwell site, ironically he then has another page dedicated to how unimportant "sharpness" is as a matter of lens quality and testing....to my amateur phtog rational brain it would seem that he is contradicting himself though maybe the point is that people consider sharpness as a test so he does it but unless as he states you shoot brick walls it wont matter....

as for 1.4 verse 1.8 the local very respected camera shop pushed me toward the 1.8 and had they gone the other way I would have probably bought the 1.4. I think as an amateur I get caught up in reading things on the web and the reality of the situation is not what I then believe it to be. anyhow I digress....i vote for the 1.8g!!

 

[TheLost]

The 50 1.4D is known to be a weak lens (soft at 1.4).. Unless you NEED 1.4 i would pick the 1.8D over the 1.4D. However, the 1.4G is an awesome lens and if you have the money its better then the 50mm 1.8D.

50mm 1.4D = Iffy
50mm 1.8D = Awesome for the Price.
50mm 1.8G = Better then the 1.8D.. but you'll have to decide if its twice the price better.
50mm 1.4G = Best, and the cost reflects it.

 

[Derrel]

The 50/1.4 G-series is known as perhaps the slowest-focusing Nikkor AF 50mm lens...it's realllllly a slowpoke for an AF-S Nikkor....so, is that an issue for you??? I dunno, I have a couple of thr 50/1.8 D models....one old, one newer...they're both identical performers...nothing "great", but not too bad either...I bought a brand-new 50mm AF-S f/1.8 G-series lens a couple months ago...and I REALLY DISLIKE the damned filter size and the danged LENSCAP SIZE!! Grrr!!! , and I loathe the huge lens hood that Nikon has fitted it with. In my opinion, they totally,totally 'effed the users over with the filter diameter and the ridiculously over-sized lens hood...it makes the 50/1.8 into a PITA lens when putting it into a fanny pack, or bag compartment,whatever...the lens is now too damned BIG for a 50!!!, and the HUGE lens hood ruins its "stealth appeal". Yet another case of a lens designer thinking with his ego instead of his brain. Most of my actual, normal, walkaround primes, my 24, my 35 and my 45-P,use 52mm filters...and 52mm lens caps...and are SMALL. Small,small,small!

I dunno...Nikkor 50's...they all are just so...."ehhhh"...I prefer the manual focus 45-P f/2.8 actually.

 

[gryffinwings]

The 50/1.4 G-series is known as perhaps the slowest-focusing Nikkor AF 50mm lens...it's realllllly a slowpoke for an AF-S Nikkor....so, is that an issue for you??? I dunno, I have a couple of thr 50/1.8 D models....one old, one newer...they're both identical performers...nothing "great", but not too bad either...I bought a brand-new 50mm AF-S f/1.8 G-series lens a couple months ago...and I REALLY DISLIKE the damned filter size and the danged LENSCAP SIZE!! Grrr!!! , and I loathe the huge lens hood that Nikon has fitted it with. In my opinion, they totally,totally 'effed the users over with the filter diameter and the ridiculously over-sized lens hood...it makes the 50/1.8 into a PITA lens when putting it into a fanny pack, or bag compartment,whatever...the lens is now too damned BIG for a 50!!!, and the HUGE lens hood ruins its "stealth appeal". Yet another case of a lens designer thinking with his ego instead of his brain. Most of my actual, normal, walkaround primes, my 24, my 35 and my 45-P,use 52mm filters...and 52mm lens caps...and are SMALL. Small,small,small!

I dunno...Nikkor 50's...they all are just so...."ehhhh"...I prefer the manual focus 45-P f/2.8 actually.

Got anything to say about the D-series 1.4?