no more 50 1.8 for me

[Nuteshack]

took it out for one more round and quickly realized why it would continue to gather dust so i gave it away....my 50 1.4 is just all that....:biggrin:

 

[tasnim_fahim]

Nuteshack,

took it out for one more round and quickly realized why it would continue to gather dust so i gave it away....my 50 1.4 is just all that....:biggrin:

I realize having both the 1.4 and 1.8 would let one be in the cupboard.
However, I have heard that the 1.8 is a much better landscape lens.

Best.

 

[evilgreg]

I'd consider doing the same with my 50/1.4 . . .

. . . if I ever find the damn thing (I know it's in the house some place). My 50/1.8 is better at every aperture they have in common, so I stopped using it long before I lost the damn thing (about seven camera bag switches ago).

Greg

 

[Gregg Heckler]

I was in the same boat as everyone here. I had a 50 1.8, then had to have a 50 1.4 and I really liked it. But I found myself using it as an expensive lens cap when I didn't have my other lenses on. Now I have 35 f/2 and I use it a lot more. It's a much better focal length on digital and it's very sharp.

 

[Nuteshack]

i must admit, after aquiring the 35f2 i seldom use the 1.4 any more...but for shooting in dim/bad hospital light and for shooting in the dark, it really shines...;-))

 

[Harry S.]

I wonder if I ever used mine (50/1.8) after getting the 45/2.8P four years ago.

Cheers

 

[weiran]

I've not touched my 50mm f/1.8 since I got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, I'm considering selling it and investing in a Nikon 20mm f/2.8 just to have a small and lightweight lens when I need it.

 

[headstand]

I've not touched my 50mm f/1.8 since I got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, I'm considering selling it and investing in a Nikon 20mm f/2.8 just to have a small and lightweight lens when I need it.

Hmm, i just bought the 50mm 1.8 and i was very pleased to see the result compared towards the 18-55 kit lens.
I think that if you see the lens for what it is you like it for its purposes.
The lens cost here 140 euro while all the other lenses you are talking about are between the 330 and the 600 euro, so for me it is the cheapest way for getting some better lens to learn more about making photos and see if i would appriciate or need the other exspensife lenses later.
I think for that its a great lens but i can imagine that after a while you will use an other lens more suitable for the pictures your making.
And if you have a 1.4 and a 1.8 at 50mm its probably logic that the 1.4 is better, but it also cost 2.5 times as much as the 1.8.

Namaste,
Aernout.

 

[weiran]

I love the 50mm focal length, but on a DX it's 75mm isn't quite what I find myself using that much. It is however a great portrait lens, very close to the 85mm portrait focal lengh on film.

 

[Cope]

This subject, like every other

just goes to show that there is no concensus on anything photgraphic related. No wonder we keep spending so much money in search of the perfect lens/body/flash/tripod/bag.:frown:

 

[fjgindy]

I started with the 50mm 1.8, quickly bought the 1.4 version and sold the 1.8. I'll always keep the 50mm 1.4 for low light concert shots etc. It's awesome for that but I really feel a need for the 35 f2.

My 35-70 2.8 has become my walk around lens but it is a touch soft at 2.8. I think the 35 f2 would compliment it for lower light situations and I'd gain sharpness.

You'll never miss the 1.8 Nute...

 

[Brent M]

My 50 f/1.8 was the only lens I owned for years, as it came with my first Nikon film body that Dad got for me while I was still in high school.

I don't use it all that often, but it's the one lens for which I have a real sentimental attachment. There will always be room in my bag for that little hunk of glass.

 

[Candidcameraman]

My 50 f/1.8 was the only lens I owned for years, as it came with my first Nikon film body that Dad got for me while I was still in high school.

I don't use it all that often, but it's the one lens for which I have a real sentimental attachment. There will always be room in my bag for that little hunk of glass.

You have a true keeper! The 1.8 is great and very sharp.

Hmm, i just bought the 50mm 1.8 and i was very pleased to see the result compared towards the 18-55 kit lens.
I think that if you see the lens for what it is you like it for its purposes.
The lens cost here 140 euro while all the other lenses you are talking about are between the 330 and the 600 euro, so for me it is the cheapest way for getting some better lens to learn more about making photos and see if i would appriciate or need the other exspensife lenses later.
I think for that its a great lens but i can imagine that after a while you will use an other lens more suitable for the pictures your making.
And if you have a 1.4 and a 1.8 at 50mm its probably logic that the 1.4 is better, but it also cost 2.5 times as much as the 1.8.

Namaste,
Aernout.

Having tried both - the 1.8 I found to be a little sharper for the type of photography I practice, I just like (a personnal preference) the softness of the 1.4 better. You can never go wrong with the 50/1.8 specially at the price level they go for.

The 1.4 vs. the 1.8 is a moot point - I used to think the 1.4 to be sharper than the 1.4 cause I did not have the 1.4, when I had both at the same time I found out there was very little differences... (Oh! The infamy!) But it is true.

Case in point... Both lenses at 2.8 can you tell which is which without looking at the Exif file? Which is better? Well it is a moot point... They are both excellent IMHO

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

View attachment 98055

This picture below was taken with a 50/1.8 ... Great lens.

View attachment 98056

 

[kbaird]

In your comparison I think the second photo looks better.

What settings were used for those photos?

 

[weiran]

Second photo looks sharper off centre.

 

[Nuteshack]

there's only one reason i got rig of my 1.8 ...considering i have an excellent sample of the 1.4 there was no reason to keep the 1.8.

shooting @1.4 in situations such as this allow me to shoot at lower iso's, thus better IQ..and with a little distance the DOF is somewhat managable...;-)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[revdhd]

Hey, Nute,

I love my 50/1.4. I use it all the time, although now that I have a 35/2, I'm wondering if the 50 will spend less time on the camera. Too early to tell.

I sure love seeing your work, though... 50 or 35 or 105 or whatever.

God bless.
Doug

 

[Candidcameraman]

In your comparison I think the second photo looks better.

What settings were used for those photos?

Thanks - Hand held using apperture priority, I think that was shot using the D70s, the first pic is using the 50/1.4 and second the 50/1.8

 

[Nuteshack]

Hey, Nute,

I love my 50/1.4. I use it all the time, although now that I have a 35/2, I'm wondering if the 50 will spend less time on the camera. Too early to tell.

I sure love seeing your work, though... 50 or 35 or 105 or whatever.

God bless.
Doug

thanks for the kind words, Doug....love the 50 but do tend to use the 35 a lot lately ...btw, do u have a place out here on the Oregon coast?
:biggrin: