Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G vs. 50mm f/1.4G @ 50mm 2.8

[DScience]

I'm just curious: In terms of general picture quality (sharpness, contrast, color, bokeh, etc.) would there be a big difference between the 24-70mm and 50mm if the zoom was shot at 50mm and both were shot at 2.8? What about 3.2, 5.6...8??

 

[TheBiles]

I suggest checking out Photozone if you want some pure resolution figures at various apertures. In general use, image quality of very nice zooms is pretty equal to most primes. I'd be hard pressed to pick out a shot by my 24-70 from my 50 1.4 at equivalent apertures.

For the lazy: (FX tests)

50:

24-70:

 

[orb9220]

+1 TheBiles I think the Majority would fail 95.6344% of the time picking images correctly for which lens was used. And for me would find the zoom more versatile and more usable in more situations.

As general seen most lenses don't start to reach optimal sharpness until 2 stops from wide open and after that would be even harder to distinguish which lens was used.
.

 

[tirediron]

...As general seen most lenses don't start to reach optimal sharpness until 2 stops from wide open and after that would be even harder to distinguish which lens was used.

True, however Nikon's 24-70 is so good even wide open that sharpness isn't a concern. I routinely shoot mine at f2.8 and have never noticed any issues. I'm sure if you pixel-peep the corners at 100% you could find some, but under normal viewing conditions? NOT an issue!

 

[DScience]

+1 TheBiles I think the Majority would fail 95.6344% of the time picking images correctly for which lens was used. And for me would find the zoom more versatile and more usable in more situations.

As general seen most lenses don't start to reach optimal sharpness until 2 stops from wide open and after that would be even harder to distinguish which lens was used.
.

I don't even get the point of your post as you don't have either lens and your statement has no informative information. Of course "most lenses" don't reach optimal sharpness, but that wasn't my question. The 24-70 is so amazing, that most would argue is just as sharp as the 50mm 1.4 @ 2.8. However, that's also not all I was wondering. I wanted to know from someone who has direct experience with these TWO lenses...Not canons, or Sony, but Nikon.

Thanks!

 

[orb9220]

And what makes you think I haven't shot with them? I might not own them now but have shot and used both of them. And thought my pointing out that not many would not be able to tell the difference between the two. Answered your general question. About sharpness,contrast,color and bokeh.

"In terms of general picture quality (sharpness, contrast, color, bokeh, etc.) would there be a big difference between the 24-70mm and 50mm if the zoom was shot at 50mm and both were shot at 2.8? What about 3.2, 5.6...8??
.

 

[IgsEMT]

Comparing my 24-70 to 50 1.4: at least in my experience
Sharpness/contrast/color: at 2.8 (50 1.4 is sharper). HOWEVER THAT difference is so minimal that unless you're having two side-by-side printed on 16x20 out of pro-level lab, & don't forget flawless technique, you won't see significant difference. But zoom is a zoom lens, and 24-70 I've used throughout its focal range on all stops and its sharp all around. 50, depending on which camera it is on, tends to back focus. I've contacted number of dealers, repair shops and even Nikon, - unfortunately it is a fault of the lens model. Knowing this, I can compensate.
Bokeh: At 2.8, I think 24-70 does a better job then 50.

If I had to chose only ONE lens, I'd go for 24-70. It is my go-to lens and used 99% of the time.
My 50, I use when shooting newborns and/or specialty/decor shots at events (at 1.4)

Comparing primes and zooms, I think, is like comparing apples and oranges. When I started in photography, I only knew primes on med-format, and after nearly a decade working with ONLY primes, going with zoom lenses ONLY makes the job faster and easier.

Good Luck

 

[2WheelPhoto]

...As general seen most lenses don't start to reach optimal sharpness until 2 stops from wide open and after that would be even harder to distinguish which lens was used.

True, however Nikon's 24-70 is so good even wide open that sharpness isn't a concern. I routinely shoot mine at f2.8 and have never noticed any issues. I'm sure if you pixel-peep the corners at 100% you could find some, but under normal viewing conditions? NOT an issue!

^^^that. I reach for my 24-70 LONG before my 50mm

 

[hamlet]

The 24-70 is my choice lens any day of the time. The price is easily justified when you consider that this covers 3 lenses worth in one. 24mm -> 50mm -> 85mm (more or less).

 

[The_Traveler]

Had both, used 50 only when the extra speed was needed.