Was I expecting too much?

[o hey tyler]

And yes, you may have been expecting too much, or it was user error. The lens won't perform well at f/1.8 optically.

Tyler, that lens (Nikkor 50mm 1.8G AF-S) actually does. It's very sharp wide open, IMO. I don't have the 105mm f/2.8 though to compare it to though.

...But what I'm saying is. It's not very sharp wide open compared to when you stop it down. It's not going to perform better on f/1.8 than it will at f/3.2 or smaller. Most of the time when people get a new fast prime, they shoot wide open exclusively. Perhaps I assumed to much.

 

[digital flower]

I think you were expecting too much comparing the 50 to the 105. I have the VR version of the 105 and it is totally amazing as far as sharpness is concerned. I chuckled when I read that the 105mm should never be used on someone over 40

The 105 cost 10x the 50mm price (for me) back awhile ago and for that extra money I would expect better design and construction.

 

[photo_joe]

I've got the 50mm 1.8 I think it is the d model and I must say the images are very sharp. Maybe the one you got is a rare lens with something not right. I'd say return it and get another one.

 

[KmH]

The 35 mm f/1.8G isn't any better, in fact is not as good as the new 50 1.8G.

 

[djacobox372]

What's your shooting distance that your using to compare? Macro lenses are optimized for close subjects while regular primes are optimized for infinity shooting.

Id expect the 50 to perform as good or better at infinity, and the macro to do better up close. Also a sub f2 lens will never perform as good wide open as a 2.8 lens, but it should be as good or better at f2.8.