Hi, I'm about to buy a Nikkor 50mm AF, I've heard that the 50/1.8 has come out better in test than the 50/1.4, is this true?. If so, whats the argument, if any, for buing the 3 times as expensive 50/1.4?

-- Paal Longva (plongva@uclink4.berkeley.edu), November 05, 1998

Answers

It is quite usual for f/1.4 lenses to give a worse performance than f/1.8 lenses, when compared at common apertures (f/8, or whatever). In addition, the slower lens will probably be better at close-ups. The difference is at f/1.4, which only one of the lenses can handle. So for available light photography, go for the faster lens. If you don't need this, the f/1.8 is a better choice.

-- Alan Gibson (Alan.Gibson@technologist.com), November 08, 1998.

I'm not too fond of sweeping generalizations like the one below. I know Canon's 50mm f1.4 lens has a good reputation, but I would have to see a side by side comparison with the f1.8 version to actually KNOW if there is a difference. I'm sure the same could be said of the Nikon.

The truth of the matter is that most 50mm lenses are very good, regardless of maximum aperture, with few exceptions. You can read the review of the Canon 50 f1.0 on photo.net if you would like to know that $2000 doesn't nessesarily buy a sharper lens, but if you need f1.0, you don't have much choice. With f1.4 vs f1.8, the choice is a little easier, especially for a Nikon. Both will likely be extremely sharp, but you will pay a lot to get the extra 1/2 stop of speed that the f1.4 will give you. Different lens coatings and design may cause one to be more prone to flare than the other, but it shouldn't be a major concern with either. The choice would be a little harder if you used an EOS due to the USM, and the ability to use full time manual focusing, but the price of the f1.8 makes up the lack of a decent focus motor. I guess I should get to the point though. Unless you have to have the extra 1/2 stop of speed, buy the f1.8. Your wallet will thank you.

-- Brad (reloader@webtv.net), November 10, 1998.

I imagine that with the 1.4 lens, you're also paying for the D technology, absent in the 1.8.

-- Michael Fuhrmann (fuhrmann@interlog.com), November 24, 1998.

Also, note that if you're going by magazine tests, some don't necessarily test all lenses at the same apertures. I vaguely remember one that tested "wide open" and "stopped down two stops." The 50/1.4 may lose in such a comparison even if it's better at any particular aperture. But that being said, you'd probably be hard pressed to see a difference in image quality between the two. I have Canon, and so could use USM/FTM to rationalize my choice (along with other intangibles like a more solid "feel," a common filter size with another lens, and that extra fraction of a stop "just in case"). I indulged myself because I use a 50mm a lot, but there are few occasions when the 1.8 wouldn't have done just as well.

-- Jim Gauch (jegauch@jonesday.com), November 25, 1998.

I owned both 50mm 1.8 af & 50mm 1.4 af both are sharp lens, however the 1.8 I feel is better. The little known thing about the 50's is that they are both very nice soft focus lenes when shot at mfd and wide open. Some of the sharpest pictures I ever took are with the 1.8 shot at f11.

-- john baran (jbaran@voicenet.com), January 02, 1999.

Nikkor 50mm f1.4 lens incorporates the D chip which is useful in 3D Matrix metering while using flash and without using flash also. I have used both the lenses and I liked the 50/1.4 more than the 50/1.8 Others choices may vary. Milind

-- Milind Tare (ridd60@hotmail.com), September 05, 2001.

I'm posting in response to Brad's desire to see a comparison of Canon's 50mm f/1.4 USM vs. f/1.8 Mk II.

Allan Engelhardt did a comparison of the two lenses at f/1.8, and posted the results on his web page (Lens Quality Part 2: Normal Lenses (50 mm)).

Keeping in mind that the test is based on a small sampling, I was still surprised & pleased to find the f/1.4 besting the f/1.8 at f/1.8 -- though they probably perform identically when stopped down.

-- Hung James Wasson (HJWasson@aol.com), September 06, 2001.

Seriously, I already owned and used for 8 years a 50mm F1.4 Nikor AIS when I ran across a good deal on the supposedly sharper 50mm 1.8. Well I bought it. I set up tripod and took a roll of pics at all aperatures using the Airforce Resolution test chart. I had the prints done in 6 x 9 to magnify any differences. NO DIFFERENCES can be seen with the naked eye regarding sharpness. Only with a 10X loupe on the print could I MAYBE ??? see a difference. So only if you were doing huge "blowups" would I even consider the difference. RESULT, I still use the 50mm 1.4 as I like the speed. I figure any faster shutter speed it allows reduces camera shake in hand held situation more than any potential increase in sharpness.

-- Scott Perkins (2scott@bellsouth.net), September 11, 2001.

I´had the same doubt, but after check in a store that the 1.4 is MADE IN CHINA, that his price is three times that of the 1.8, and that the 1.4 weights 230 grams, against the 160 grams of the 1.8 (that´s nice for backpacking, together with the f65/n65), now I think that buying the 1.4 would not be very wise, specially if you can live without the D functions, the plus 1/2 f stop and his suposed better optics.

-- joaquin brintrup (jbrintrup@yahoo.com -- Paal Longva (plongva@uclink4.berkeley.edu) -- Paal Longva (plongva@uclink4.berkeley.edu)), October 08, 2001.

well, the 1.8 is also MADE IN CHINA, in fact you can find both lenses made in china or japan :)

-- joaquin brintrup (jbrintrup@yahoo.com), October 09, 2001.

I have owned a Nikkor AF 50mm F1.8 for 1 year. Optic is good. Price is cheap - $87 !! Size is light and small. No need of maintenance, although it is "plasticky".

Made in China is not a problem nowadays. Most of the IBM and Compaq PCs are made in China too!! They are being deployed in serious applicaitons. If the F1.8 breaks, then I can easily afford to buy a new one.

The extra 1/2 stop does not mean much to me. Unless the "D" chip (3D Matrix) is really a determinant, I fully support the F1.8 instead of the 1.4. And will save a lot money for another lense too!

-- TAM (whrtam88@hotmail.com), March 11, 2002.