Which Lens?

[Kristie]

I'm wanting to get a new lens. A prime lens.

I currently have the Nikkor 18-70mm, and I've been looking at the 50mm 1.4 or 1.8.
Which is better? Why?
What else would you recommend? Why?

thanks.

 

[Myspacepix!]

id do the 1.8/ im getting this lens bout 150-200 dollars less depending on where you buy, and just as sharp pix :thumbup:

 

[fmw]

The 1.4 would be better, of course, because it is faster.

 

[Alex_B]

in the canon world the 1.4 would also be sharper at 1.8 than the 1.8 at 1.8. Also it is better build ... I could imagine this is similar with Nikon?

1.4 gives you some more creative freedom when it comes to depth of field. and there is a small advantage in available light photography.

 

[Garbz]

The 1.8 would be better, of course, because it is sharper.

As you can see it depends on what you are aiming for. The f1.8 at f5.6IIRC outperforms the sensor on the D200. Although if you are using a D40-80 you will probably get no noticable or even measurable difference between them.

 

[Alex_B]

The 1.8 would be better, of course, because it is sharper.

really?

you are referring to the two different lenses set at the same aperture or to one lens at to different apertures.

 

[panocho]

i've also read that the 1.8 is sharper (i'm talking about nikkors). on the other hand, it is quite cheaper, which might matter considerably (it does in my case). and then, for most situations i don't think you really benefit from the litlle-bit-faster that the 14 gives you.
then... i would go for the 1.8. that's what i actually have, and am happy with it. of course, if money is not an issue at all, then the 1.4 might be something to consider. don't know it, but i'm sure that, little bit more/little bit less, it must be quite sharp

 

[fmw]

The 1.8 would be better, of course, because it is sharper.

As you can see it depends on what you are aiming for. The f1.8 at f5.6IIRC outperforms the sensor on the D200. Although if you are using a D40-80 you will probably get no noticable or even measurable difference between them.

Here we get down to definitions as I was just discussing with Alex on PM. I define sharpness as resolution and I compare lens sharpness at the periphery of the image circle since they are all sharp at the center. While the f1.8 is sharper by that definition at f1.8 than the f1.4 is at f1.4, the f1.4 is actually a better performer at f1.8 than the f1.8 is.

Theoretically, a slower lens should be sharper than a faster one of similar design and usually is. The reason is that there is less glass, less refraction going on inside and, hence, less need for correction of aberrations. But in this case, the f1.4 Nikkor is a significantly different design which is better corrected than the f1.8. The f1.4 costs nearly twice as much as a result. The differences are very subtle, as mentioned above, but the f1.4 will actually outperform the f1.8 at apertures they share in common. Obviously this is not true of all lenses sharing the same focal length.

 

[Kristie]

Thank you everyone!

Do you all think it's wise for me to get a prime 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 lens?
Do you think I should be looking into something else right now?

I'll tell you a little about myself:
I like to shoot portrait, close-up, landscapes, wildlife.
I dont shoot Sports

Right now while shooting I deal with some problems...not always...but it happens...
I can't get close enough (not enough zoom and macro)
I need to back up (wide angle)
the images dont seem sharp enough (fast lens?)

So keeping that in mind, does it sound like the 50mm prime would make a nice addition or would you recommend something else?

 

[AJ Jewell]

I have a question about these lenses, if I may:

im assuming we are all talking about this lens:
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/st...artmentId=10407&itemID=37141&categoryId=10412

As this is not a DX series lens, is this going to do anything to the image captured? Why make DX lenses if these work fine?

 

[fmw]

I have a question about these lenses, if I may:

im assuming we are all talking about this lens:
http://www.henrys.com/webapp/wcs/st...artmentId=10407&itemID=37141&categoryId=10412

As this is not a DX series lens, is this going to do anything to the image captured? Why make DX lenses if these work fine?

For the most part, the DX lenses are zooms that go wider than normal on an APS sized sensor. Wide angle lenses for 35mm cameras aren't very wide angle on the APS frame.

 

[AJ Jewell]

so a prime 50mm/1.4 is fine on an d70?

 

[paulocon]

Hi,

Good article on Prime Lenses here...
http://www.photographyvoter.com/story.php?title=Prime-Lenses--Introduction

 

[xfloggingkylex]

FMW, would you say the difference in sharpness between the 1.4 and 1.8 lenses shot at say f/8 would be noticable enough to warrent the price difference?

And Kristie, the 50mm will work fine for portraits. I know FMW likes something a little longer, but you can definitely get by with the 50mm, stopped down a little you'll have nice sharp pictures with creamy bokeh. Not to mention it is a great lens to have. (either the 1.8 or the 1.4)

 

[Kristie]

Thanks everyone! I've completely went in the different direction and just ordered the 18-200mm AF VR to replace my 18-70mm.
In the future once I have more figured out I will ad the 50mm