Nikon 1.8 G Vs 1.4 G

Is there any specific lens? Looking at the pics from FroKnowsPhoto for the 50mm, the difference between the 1.8 and 1.4 doesnt look that much different.
 
the 50 1.8 G is:
-Lighter than 1.4
-Has aspherical element
-is said to be sharper wide open
the 50 1.4 G
-faster!
-heavier
-9 blade aperture ring Vs 7 on the 1.8G

that is all theory... waiting to see real world results!
 
I think it would matter more knowing how they compare with both at f/1.8

if they are equal then the f/1.4 still has the edge in that it has the ability to use that extra 2/3 stop when needed

as a side note photozone.de has tested both lenses on FX and to me it looks like the f/1.4 has the edge. here are their numbers from both lenses wide open:

50mm f/1.4G @ f/1.4 center 3262 border 2980 extreme edge 2861

50mm f/1.8G @ f/1.8 center 3176 border 3025 extreme edge 2820

Judging from these numbers I would think that if you stopped the f/1.4 down to f/1.8 and compared them the f/1.4 would have better numbers across the frame
at f/2 the 50 1.4G is quite amazing... just judging the photos.
 
looking at the preliminary photos posted by the members here, the 1.8 Bokeh seems more "Nervous" compared the 1.4G @ 1.8, I think the 7 blades aperture ring make it more an oval than a circle...
 
looking at the preliminary photos posted by the members here, the 1.8 Bokeh seems more "Nervous" compared the 1.4G @ 1.8, I think the 7 blades aperture ring make it more an oval than a circle...
Blades don't make a difference if you are comparing the 1.8G wide open, there are no blades closing down.
 
Had both sold the 1.4 and replaced with the 1.8, 2 great lenses for price the 1.8 excels but I still think the 1.4 was superior but worth the extra?.
 
The 1.8 is a DX lens and performs like a 1940 lens on FX. I would not think of using on my FX cameras, but I love it on any DX body. My lens of choice there.

AFD 35 is not a great lens on FX, but then I got the 1.4 G a few weeks.
All I can say is superb.
 
Blades don't make a difference if you are comparing the 1.8G wide open, there are no blades closing down.
Not blades, but according to Photozone's review:

Background highlights are not perfectly circular wide open towards the borders due to mechnical vignetting.
Definitely seeing this in some of the samples being posted here and other forums. Like:

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showpost.php?p=3577765&postcount=32

Not an unusual characteristic in these type of lens. So not the end of the world.

The new lens looks really good.

For the price of the Nikon 50/1.4G, one can buy both the 35/1.8G and 50/1.8G and have US$60 for lunch. :biggrin: You lose 2/3 of a stop on the 50, and whatever small sharpness differences exist won't be visible except sometimes with extreme pixel peeping.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Have folks who also have the 1.4G found focusing speed to be better with the 1.8G? I've seen some posts saying that it's faster but am curious if anyone's done a direct comparison?
 
The 1.8 is a DX lens and performs like a 1940 lens on FX. I would not think of using on my FX cameras, but I love it on any DX body. My lens of choice there.

AFD 35 is not a great lens on FX, but then I got the 1.4 G a few weeks.
All I can say is superb.
I think they're talking about the 50mm, all of which are FX. :wink:
 
I think it would matter more knowing how they compare with both at f/1.8
Jared Polin doesn't have shots from both lenses @ 1.8, but he does have comparison pics of both @ 2.8 and these two seem to be dead even in sharpness. btw, it would be unfair for the 50/1.8G if both were shot at 1.8 because the 50/1.4G would be stopped down and the 50/1.8G would be wide open.

The 1.8 is a DX lens and performs like a 1940 lens on FX. I would not think of using on my FX cameras, but I love it on any DX body. My lens of choice there.
I think they're talking about the new 50/1.8G
 
Not blades, but according to Photozone's review:



Definitely seeing this in some of the samples being posted here and other forums. Like:

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showpost.php?p=3577765&postcount=32
Right but the post I was refering to was directly relating the 7 blades to bad bokeh... when wide open that would'nt be the case. As you mentioned.

Have folks who also have the 1.4G found focusing speed to be better with the 1.8G? I've seen some posts saying that it's faster but am curious if anyone's done a direct comparison?
I don't have my 1.4G anymore, but the focus throw is around 1/4 (okay maybe 1/2, but its way short now) of what the 1.4G was... same motor but shorter throw, its much faster. There is a video I posted in the 50 1.8G images thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
btw, it would be unfair for the 50/1.8G if both were shot at 1.8 because the 50/1.4G would be stopped down and the 50/1.8G would be wide open.

In a heads up comparison, how else would you fairly say which is better knowing that the 1.8 is limited to 1.8? If you need the 2/3 stop, you have no choice, but if you are like me and have a 1.4, but are considering a 1.8, I am interested in the direct comparison because I really don't need to shoot at 1.4 very often.
 
...

I don't have my 1.4G anymore, but the focus throw is around 1/4 (okay maybe 1/2, but its way short now) of what the 1.4G was... same motor but shorter throw, its much faster. There is a video I posted in the 50 1.8G images thread.
Good to know, thanks!

After owning the 50/1.4G and the Sigma 50/1.4 for almost two years, I sold the 1.4G a couple of months ago. Only used it the 5% of the time when I wasn't planning on using a 50mm much and wanted a lighter lens in the bag just in case. I might pick up the 50/1.8G for that role. And who knows, maybe it'll get more than 5% use if its rendering is better than the 1.4G.
 
I think it would matter more knowing how they compare with both at f/1.8
yes!!! I can't believe people keep doing this sort of thing. it is totally misleading and I hope they stop (yeah right). I do suspect the 1.8G will beat the 1.4G at 1.8, but that's because I never considered the 50G to be all that good. It always felt like it wasn't designed as a "pro" lens. maybe they are really waiting on that 50 1.2 AF-S? who knows.

The 1.8 is a DX lens and performs like a 1940 lens on FX
funny. Although the 50 1.8 is a proper FX lens I get where you're going :)
 
Top