Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by FotoPhocus, Aug 14, 2008.
This one's for you Nute!
Edit, this was shot wide open at 1.8
No EXIF. Was that shot wide open?
Nikon 50mm f1.8 - First Shot
August 14, 2008
This is a great photo, and that is a great lens, I own two of them. It will turn out to be the best $120.00 or so that you spent. Remember to get the Nikon HR-2 lens hood for that lens, and a clear 52mm filter.
This lens is one of the sharpest lenses that Nikon makes according to many photographers. Again, it is a great piece of glass that is low in cost.
Enjoy your lens.
Yep, sorry - it was wide open at 1.8
Very nice :smile:
Very nice, I hope you enjoy the lens.
Thanks guys. I am LOVING this camera / lens combo!!
Nice shot.. I need to shoot with mine more often..
Looks good for being the first shots
Finally glad the wait is over for your camera? hehehe
Awesome for the 1st shots.. At last the ever lasting wait is over.. Let the photos roll now..
i also have 50mm 1.8, it owns just lovely sharpness, but the focus sometimes is hard to see on the LCD screen on the camera:S so i only see it afterwards (i use d50 though)
Why a clear filter, if you don't mind my asking?
probably because a clear filter is better than no filter (and cheaper than anything fancy)
(wanders off to get a circuliar polarizer for his 50 1.8)
I have 2 of the 50mm f/1.8, one new and one about 25 years old.
I am also using a D80, love the combo.
And why is that?
Even if you follow the argument that a UV filter helps protect the lens, why would you bother with such an inexpensive lens? If you bought a cheap filter, it would impact image quality, and if you bought an expensive filter, you'd approach the cost of the lens itself...
Just seems like odd, and wrongheaded, advice...
because if you drop your 'cheap' lens and crack the optics - you need to spend $100 again - if you drop it and crack your $10 clear filter (which saved your optics from cracking) you're only out $10
Well, on the topic of putting cheap "glass" in front of your not-cheap glass, you might read the following discussion:
I haven't noticed any difference in IQ between having the filter on, and having the filter off. And, I'm quite happy with the results I get with the filter on.
If you do use filters(I do), the 50mm is one that you could get away without.
The front lens element is recessed far into the lens body. In fact you can get by without a hood also(I also use for all my other lenses).