Nikon 50mm 1.4G VS. 1.8G

[Imaginephotography]

I am looking to get the 50mm lens for my D90. Could you pleAse tell me if there is a big difference between the 1.4 and the 1.8? There is about a $300 price difference in the two. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, T

 

[NayLoMo6C]

1) build quality is better on 1.4
2) able to achieve less DOF with greater bokeh on 1.4
3) less color fringing on 1.4

all according to my friend who owns one

 

[crimbfighter]

Also, which version of the 1.4 are you talking about? The older AF version or the newest AF-S version? I assume with the $300 price difference you're talking about, you're in fact referring to the 1.8 AF vs. the newer 1.4 AF-S version. Obvious differences being the newer one has its own focusing motor built in, is Nikon's gilded version (meaning it doesn't have an external aperture ring) and has their latest bells and whistles of technology. If you're on a budget, I'm sure the 1.8 will do you just fine. Especially since it will autofocus on you D90. If you can afford the extra money ($200 more for the older 1.4 AF / $300 more for the newer 1.4 AF-S) you will get the added benefits already mentioned above by NayLoMo6C.

 

[Davor]

1) build quality is better on 1.4
2) able to achieve less DOF with greater bokeh on 1.4
3) less color fringing on 1.4

all according to my friend who owns one

I don't think you understand what bokeh is, you can not have "greater" bokeh since it is the aesthetic quality of the blur so you can say it has more quality bokeh over the 1.8

 

[NayLoMo6C]

1) build quality is better on 1.4
2) able to achieve less DOF with greater bokeh on 1.4
3) less color fringing on 1.4

all according to my friend who owns one

I don't think you understand what bokeh is, you can not have "greater" bokeh since it is the aesthetic quality of the blur so you can say it has more quality bokeh over the 1.8

i guess that's what i was trying to say :er:

 

[flea77]

I don't think you understand what bokeh is, you can not have "greater" bokeh since it is the aesthetic quality of the blur so you can say it has more quality bokeh over the 1.8

Maybe. If you have two lenses, one with a max of 2.8 and one with a max of 1.4, both of which had the same quality of bokeh, would not the 1.4 have greater bokeh since out of focus objects would be MORE out of focus? How about the fact that more objects would be out of focus generating more, or greater bokeh? Or do you combine the quantity and quality into one value, which is bokeh?

Personally I see the quantity and quality as two distinct things.

Allan

 

[KmH]

I don't think you understand what bokeh is, you can not have "greater" bokeh since it is the aesthetic quality of the blur so you can say it has more quality bokeh over the 1.8

Maybe. If you have two lenses, one with a max of 2.8 and one with a max of 1.4, both of which had the same quality of bokeh, would not the 1.4 have greater bokeh since out of focus objects would be MORE out of focus? How about the fact that more objects would be out of focus generating more, or greater bokeh? Or do you combine the quantity and quality into one value, which is bokeh?

No. Because bokeh is an esthetic quality, not a quantity, and is determined by the number and shape of the aperture blades and some other lens construction particulars like lens coatings and internal air gaps.

 

[MichiganFarts]

Certainly, if you HDR your bokeh shots, you will have at the very least, 3 times greater bokeh.

 

[djacobox372]

If you want something a little better then the 50mm f1.8 af-d and not quite as expensive as the 50mm f1.4 AF-S G, then you should look into a 50mm f1.4 af-d.

The 50mm f1.4 af-d is only around $100 more then the 1.8 version. Your d90 has an af motor so you don't need to buy the af-s lenses, and in low focal lengths like 50mm AF-S provides zero benefit IMO.

There is very little difference between 1.4 and 1.8, only around 1/2 stop. And both lenses are soft when shot wide open. The reason to buy a 1.4 is the fact that it looks quite a bit better then the 1.8 when shot at f2.