Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D or 50mm f/1.8D?

[tfa8rva]

I'm looking to get a 50mm fixed lens and I was wondering if someone explain to me the differences between these two lenses, and whether it's worth the difference in price. Thanks.

[Rooz]

well the obvious difference is that the 1.4 is a 3rd of a stop faster. so essentially...can be a 3rd of a stop less iso, or greater shutter speed or less DOF.

not sure if i can say it's worth it or not cos the 1.8 is sharper and costs a heck of alot less so my vote goes to the 1.8.

[Classic96]

I have owned both and have personally found the 1.4 to be cleaer and sharper. It also has much nicer construction and glass. It does come at a cost 3 times that of the 1.8 however.

[jcon]

From everything I have read and seen, the 1.4 has much better bokeh and is sharper. I guess its all up to the buyer whether its worth the extr cash or not, for me, it wasnt.

[Rooz]

i have never read anywhere that the 1.4 is sharper. better bokeh, i'm sure. but sharper ? i've personally never seen any evidence of that, in fact quite the contrary. (photozone's test is just one example).

interesting to hear classics view since he's owned both.

[Classic96]

I in no way claim to be an expert, but from what I experienced, those were my findings. I have absolutely no technical data to back it up, only what my eyes see. So please take what I say with a grain of salt.

[diffusedmind]

I just got the f/1.8D and i'm quite pleased with it. Personally I think it's very sharp, but then again, i've never seen the f/1.4. I'd go with the f/1.8D because the extra oomph of sharpness you may gain isn't worth the extra cost (in my eyes).

[cvicisso]

I got the 1.8 for Christmas and love it. I have never used the 1.4, but I'm sure it's great.

You know that old cliche 'if you have to ask how much it costs, you probably can't afford it?' Well... please don't take this the wrong way ;), but... if you have to ask what the difference is betweeen the 50mm f/1.4 and the f/1.8, then I would say with very strong certainty that if you are undecided between the two you should absolutely get the f/1.8. If there is any advantage to the 1.4 over the 1.8 (like 1/3 of a stop), it would not be worth the extra cost for you (or me).

If you're coming from kit lenses (like I was), the 50mm f/1.8 literally opens up a whole new world of photography for only one hundred bucks. Low light, shallow depths of field, etc. It's an amazing yet incredibly-affordable transformation. It will work great on your D80 (including autofocus). The f/1.4 costs four times as much, but probably wouldn't be four times as amazing as the f/1.8 (again - if you're coming from kit and/or slow lenses).

The 50mm f/1.8 is a great tool, and an incredibly good deal. Very few people are dissappointed by it (I know of only one).

[tfa8rva]

I appreciate everyones input. I will most likely be ordering the 50mm f/1.8D unless there is some compelling reason to get the f/1.4D. Thanks.

[WestCoast]

I have owned both and have personally found the 1.4 to be cleaer and sharper. It also has much nicer construction and glass. It does come at a cost 3 times that of the 1.8 however.

:eek:

Wow, that's insane.

[Jason25]

From all the images I've seen, the 1.8 seems to have a warmer hue to its images, while the 1.4 looks "cooler" to me.

[erichlund]

I have owned both and have personally found the 1.4 to be cleaer and sharper. It also has much nicer construction and glass. It does come at a cost 3 times that of the 1.8 however.

Your information is a little out of date. It was, at one time, about 3x the price of the 1.8. It's now about 2 1/4 times the price. ;)

I have used both, though I only own the 1.8. If I had to do it again, I would have saved up for the 1.4. However, I really don't use it much, preferring the length of my 35mm f2.

[VTEC_EATER]

I got the F/1.8 as a means to get into low light photography. When Nikon eventually starts producing AF-S primes, I will probably pick up the F/1.4. I just couldn't justify the cost of the 1.4 if I knew I was going to have to replace it.

[Screenclutter]

I got the F/1.8 as a means to get into low light photography. When Nikon eventually starts producing AF-S primes, I will probably pick up the F/1.4. I just couldn't justify the cost of the 1.4 if I knew I was going to have to replace it.

A question I would ask is which non-telephoto prime Nikon will update to make it AF-S. I'd be surprised if they updated all of them at once. Nikon would want to increase their profit margin, and upgrading a cheap and well performing 50mm lens (both of them) wouldn't make sense from a business perspective. I'd think they would be more likely to release new AF-S primes instead. AF-S 50mm f/1.2 or f/1.0 maybe?

I'm not sure why an AF-S prime would make a difference for you though, based on what I see in your signature.

[tcadwall]

If you can't use the extra dough for something else <then call me I can give you a place to donate> then we can probably offer some suggestions. The f/1.8 is a ton of bang for next to nothing. GREAT images. It is a little "cheap" feeling, but mine has probably taken over 3k images, and has been mounted and removed a few dozen times at least - showing no wear so far.

Image quality is great. Bokeh is good even though the 1.4 is supposedly better. I bought the 1.8 because the 1.4 would have been a special order when I happened to need it ASAP. Shop told me they would gladly order and give me full trade in if I wanted to change later... Never looked back.

[VTEC_EATER]

I'm not sure why an AF-S prime would make a difference for you though, based on what I see in your signature.

Full-time manual focus override is a nice thing to have on lenses with such little depth of field. Its something that screw driven lenses can never offer. Also, I prefer the silent, and typically faster, focusing of the AF-S lenses over the screw driven ones.

I thought with upgrading to the D300 I would have a "faster" auto focus with screw-driven lenses, but it seems the same to me. Its not bad, but it can definitely be improved upon, especially when you compare the 70-200 VR against any screw driven lens. That lens is just blisteringly fast to focus.

[aparmley]

My advice would be:

get the 35 F2.0 and the 50 1.8. Decide which focal lenght you prefer. If you actually prefer the 50mm focal lenght to the 35 focal lenght, sell both to fund the 50 1.4 and you'll be happy. If you prefer the 35mm focal lenght (which most do) then you won't be upset that you spent $290 on the 1.4 and bonus, you get the 50 1.8 just incase you need the reach and speed. Sure, its a little more money but you have two great lenses and more flexibile for just another ~$140.

I personally own the 50 1.4. Build quality and the fact that the 1.4 version will be sharper at 1.8 mean enough to me to pay the difference. I have been nothing but pleased with the 50 1.4. However, that doesn't mean its for everyone. If the first option is not possible then money is tight and you value bargins, which the 50 1.8 is so just purchase that and be happy.

Best of luck.

[Screenclutter]

My advice would be: get the 35 F2.0 and the 50 1.8.


Following this reasoning, another combo you might want to consider is the 50mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.8 if you are more interested in portrait shots.

[dukpoki]

hey guys i'm new here. this is a good topic for me as i'm also deciding between the two primes.

here is a useful site i found:
http://www.smartpict.com/lenstest/Nikon_50_18_VS_50_14/US_test_Nikon_50mm_14_VS_18.php

judging from the test it seems like tester puts 1.4d as the winner and it's completely true when you compare the stops & the sharpness in the area of the bucket he uses. however after analyzing the pics even further, the 1.4d seems to be worse(less sharp) where the grasses on the lower right side of the wall seem to be growing. also it is apparent that the 1.8d is warmer in the pics. after the conclusion of the tester, i was dead set on getting the 1.4 but after seeing that one flaw with the grasses i'm now considering the 1.8. any thoughts?

[erichlund]

hey guys i'm new here. this is a good topic for me as i'm also deciding between the two primes.

here is a useful site i found:
http://www.smartpict.com/lenstest/Nikon_50_18_VS_50_14/US_test_Nikon_50mm_14_VS_18.php

judging from the test it seems like tester puts 1.4d as the winner and it's completely true when you compare the stops & the sharpness in the area of the bucket he uses. however after analyzing the pics even further, the 1.4d seems to be worse(less sharp) where the grasses on the lower right side of the wall seem to be growing. also it is apparent that the 1.8d is warmer in the pics. after the conclusion of the tester, i was dead set on getting the 1.4 but after seeing that one flaw with the grasses i'm now considering the 1.8. any thoughts?

Which photo pair gives the best example of what you have said above? I don't want to download all of them.

[K1W1]

Your information is a little out of date. It was, at one time, about 3x the price of the 1.8. It's now about 2 1/4 times the price. ;)


Here it's even closer. Aus$185.00 for the 1.8 and Aus$369.00 for the 1.4

[dukpoki]

Which photo pair gives the best example of what you have said above? I don't want to download all of them.

pretty much straight down the line for the 1.4d you will see that on the right side of the picture it is very blurry compared to the 1.8d.

if you wanted to pick, then you could start from the top @f/1.8 (1.4d) or f/1.4 (1.4d) compared to @f/1.8 (1.8d) and you will see that it's blurry. also f/2.8 (1.4d) compared to f/4.5 (1.8) where the tester claims this is the minimum stop to reach each len's full sharp potential.

perhaps the fault is not with the lens but with the focusing of the tester? i sure can't say because i'm actually new to all things photography. :o imo it seems like if you picked the widest angle for each lens to look at, you will see that they could be cut in half (left side for the 1.4d and right side for the 1.8d) and then stitched together to make one fully sharp picture.

hope you got all that. :P

[tcadwall]

duk,

I can't see the test site through my firewall, but from what you describe, I actually think this must be a depth of field thing more than a lens sharpness thing. Even at smaller apertures, the focus point still plays a big part of what how in focus the rest of the scene is. Both of these lenses are good enough that they should not be obviously flawed in sharpness.

[erichlund]

duk,

I can't see the test site through my firewall, but from what you describe, I actually think this must be a depth of field thing more than a lens sharpness thing. Even at smaller apertures, the focus point still plays a big part of what how in focus the rest of the scene is. Both of these lenses are good enough that they should not be obviously flawed in sharpness.

Exactly. I looked at the two f1.8 photos. You cannot compare an f1.4 photo to the f1.8 photo outside the area of critical focus, because the f1.4 lens at a larger aperture has shallower depth of field (even if only marginally). Look only at the point of critical focus. In the area of critical focus, and the area within each lenses depth of field, the f1.4 is much sharper.

It is quite possible that the f1.4 is slightly off axis on it's focus (I didn't spend the time to take a critical look at this, and you would want a shot of a wall taken facing directly coplaner with the wall). This can be adjusted by Nikon. On the other hand, it could just be the positioning of the cameras.

Also, on my monitors, one of which is physically calibrated, the f1.4 lens shows the wall slightly pinker. This would be the warmer lens.

[dukpoki]

thanks guys for clearing most of it out. after analyzing the photos with what you guys said i think i see it now. but just to be clear, if the 2 lenses are @ the same stop, they both would have the same dof or no?

[tcadwall]

Everything else equal, yes. IOW - both being the same focal length.
Of course, this is still very hard to replicate unless you are shooting a ruler, and are in a completely controlled environment. In other words, if your focus point is at all different, your test is ruined.

[dolphin]

hey guys i'm new here. this is a good topic for me as i'm also deciding between the two primes.

here is a useful site i found:
http://www.smartpict.com/lenstest/Nikon_50_18_VS_50_14/US_test_Nikon_50mm_14_VS_18.php

?

Very useful test dukpoki thanks !