Anyone own a nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-s?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by flosseR, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. flosseR macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #1
    Hi, long time no post .. geez..

    Anyway I am thinking of purchasing a new Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-s for my little sister in law who got a D5000 kit last xmas from us.

    I am reading very mixed reviews on this so someone who owns one would be a much greater help if you could share your impression and overall feel of that lens.

    Bear in mind she is 15 and a beginner but very interested in photography (constantly borrowing my stuff :))

    Anyone?
     
  2. scbrain macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    #2
    No, but almost

    I just got the 35 mm f1.8 yesterday. I've taken only 45 photos so far, but it's pretty awesome. It can make good pictures in much darker spaces than can the kit lens.

    I've read that the 50mm is a less useful zoom level - it magnifies things more than the 35mm, which might be good for close portraits but is bad for small rooms.

    You can read indepth reviews of all these deals at kenrockwell.com. He gets kinda cranky sometimes, but he does know his details, and he always recommends the cheaper option when it's good.

    SCB
     
  3. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #3
    I'm normally not a 50mm fan- but I like the lens a lot. I've had it for about six months now and I'd say it's a keeper. I'd recommend it.

    Paul
     
  4. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #4
    Thanks Paul, if you give it a go it cannot be bad so ... ordered it :)

    Thanks again
     
  5. fpnc macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #5
    I'm not sure why you would want the 50mm AF-S over the 35mm. For an APS-C sized camera like the D5000 the 35mm is closer to a "normal" lens than the 50mm. The 50mm would be better for head-and-shoulder portraits but for most other purposes the 35mm will give you a more normal perspective and wider area of coverage (scenery and indoors). Although perspective depends upon subject distance (not lens focal length), you'll find that you need to stand back further with the 50mm than with the 35mm and that can either be an advantage or disadvantage depending upon your subject.

    In any case, I think both lenses are pretty good and you probably couldn't go wrong with either.
     
  6. sapporobaby macrumors 68000

    sapporobaby

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Location:
    3 earth minutes from your location....
    #6
    Have you considered getting her a decent zoom? This way she will get the best of both worlds and not have to borrow all the time.

    I did this for my daughter. I bought here a D3100 that comes with a kit lens. However, she discovered my 28-300 and loves that so I gave it to her. She was recently playing with my 14-24mm, and the 24-70mm and fell in love. She ain't getting those. She will get the D3S when Nikon gets off their butts and release a successor, but she still ain't getting those lenses. :)
     
  7. whodareswins macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    #7
    I shall be getting one rather soon. Can't wait! I have seen some incredibly impressive photos taken with it.
     
  8. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #8
    you make compelling reasons for the 35mm but she loves to take portraits of her friends and the kit 18-55 is limiting so I figured let's start there.
    I had the same experience with her and my 24-70 and no, she is not getting that one either :)
     
  9. standingquiet macrumors 6502

    standingquiet

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #9
    The 50mm 1.8f is not 50mm on the D5000 its 75mm with the 1.5x crop factor of the DX sensor.

    The 35mm 1.8f is the best option for a DX Sensor camera giving 52.5mm with the 1.5x crop factor.

    When i had my D90 i had the 35mm 1.8 and for the price its one of the greatest lenses available for a DX camera. I worked with the 50mm 2.4f and if the room was small enough found it very restrictive.
     
  10. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #10
    Yea.. i get that... no need to repeat this.


    I beg to differ, I shoot a lot of portraits and I almost never am in the 35mm range, finding myself rather 50-70mm on my 24-70 (which make it 75-105mm), sometimes i even use the 105mm to shoot certain portraits. It might be the best option for YOU but not for me and judging by the type of portraits that she shoots it's mostly head and shoulders.

    Thanks though for the input, i ordered the 50mm already.

    //F
     
  11. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #11
    For an all-round prime, I recommend looking into either Sigma's 30 mm f/1.4 or Nikon's 35 mm f/1.8. Even though the Sigma hasn't received good reviews, it's my always-on lens and taking pictures in the dark wide open is addictive :D
     
  12. Azurael macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    #12
    As someone who works for a camera retailer, it really irks me than the AF-S 50mm 1.8 is more than twice as much as the EF 50 1.8 (which works on any Canon EOS body)... Because everybody should have a 50 1.8 for portraiture (or maybe an 85/105) Thankfully I have a D90 so I get AF on the AF 1.8 D.
     
  13. robwormald macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #13
    i have the 50mm f1.4 nikon lens. It's brilliant in low light, but I find it way less useful than my 35mm equivalent. it always seems to be too close.
     
  14. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #14
    For single-person portraits, or if you're just more "telephoto" the 50mm on a crop camera is nice.

    Paul

    ----------

    It's a much newer lens and a redesign, not just a port of the AF-D.

    Paul

    ----------

    Just remember to borrow it a lot! ;)

    Paul
     
  15. baypharm macrumors 65816

    baypharm

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    #15
    It is a great low light lens. But it's not optimal for portraits. You would have to be too close to get a decent portrait shot. Generally the rule of thumb is for head and shoulder portraits, a 90mm is the minimum focal length with 135mm being the optimum.
     
  16. Azurael macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    #16
    Oh yeah, the AF is obviously quieter and faster (at least on my D90) but are you suggesting the D wasn't sharp enough as is? It already blows pretty much any zoom, pro or otherwise out if the water. Since 50mm prunes are pretty much the first additional lens most people buy after the kit rubbish or a cheapo tele, I'm quite convinced we'd be selling even more d3100s in comparison to the pile of rubbish (comparatively) that us the 1100d if the AFS 50 G weren't so overpriced. Is it really worth more than double what a nifty fifty costs? I don't think so! May as well spend the extra dosh and get the 1.4...
     
  17. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #17
    The cheapest 50 1.8D i found was 128USD, the heapest 50 1.4 was a bit uder 400 USD and the 50 AF-s that i just bought was 180USD (with an amazon rebate i had :) ... i think that price is ok...

    I think with time that new AF-s will drop in price. The 1.8D was stellar, no question but she needs the AF-s :) ...
     
  18. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #18
    In 35mm terms, the 50mm on a crop body has the angle of view of a 75mm, that's just for portraits, that's the equivalent of a 120mm lens on a 645, a good working portrait lens. I've shot lots of studio portraits with a 35-70mm, and "too close" isn't an issue for me- however if you're looking at fast glass, the only options at f/1.8 in a Nikkor are the 35mm, which is too wide, the 50mm which is good and the 85mm which requires a lot of distance on a crop body (but which I'd rather shoot with when possible.) Unfortunately, Nikon has yet to release an AF-S version of the 85mm f/1.8, so you're looking at ~1700 for the f/1.4 versus ~220 for the 50mm.

    I love shooting the occasional portrait with the 400/2.8, but running back and forth to get posing right can be a bit of a pain ;)

    The 50mm AF-D lens was 6 elements in 5 groups. The new 50mm f/1.8 AF-S is 7 elements in 6 groups. It's also better coated. The list price difference for the extra element and silent wave motor is $85. The new lens has better resolution at the sides of the frame as well as better bokeh.

    Sharpness, is good, 3958 (line widths per picture height) at the center at f/5.6 is as good as it gets in Photozone's Imatest results. By contrast, the 70-200 VRII is at 4028 at 70mm and f/4 and the 24-70 is at 3988 at 24mm and f/4, so indeed it does not "blow pretty-much any zoom, pro or otherwise out of the water." Whilst the zooms do have slightly lower numbers at the far end, they're close enough that you really can't characterize the difference as "blowing" anything away. It's in the same ballpark as the Zeiss Makro Planar f/2 on a full frame body (a bit better actually,) so sharpness is most definitely "good enough" for most uses, but it's definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

    I do think the new lens is comparable, if not slightly better than the old f/1.4 AF-D though obviously slower.

    With that said, for the price, it's a very good lens- certainly the bokeh improvements over the previous model are worth it to me- I tend to look at lens investments in terms of at least a decade- and I'd gladly pay $8.50 a year for better bokeh in every wide-aperture shot I take. Even at list price, $22/year over the life of the lens works for me- which is why I own one.

    I don't shoot a lot of low light, so for me it's more about subject isolation and bokeh than speed- but I don't see great alternatives without spending at least twice as much. I shoot the lens on both FX and DX, and I can crop the heck out of my FX shots without really losing anything- the next option in the line is the 60mm f/2.8 or one of the 85mms.

    Paul
     
  19. DaReal_Dionysus macrumors regular

    DaReal_Dionysus

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    #19
    I have the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G and the pictures with this lens are awesome and with the money.

    here is an example with that lens that I shot of a model in a studios with the 50mm

    [​IMG]
     
  20. Hey Jude macrumors 6502a

    Hey Jude

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Location:
    Florida
    #20
    Great picture ---- I am glad to hear that you like the lens as I received mine on Thursday. I am a novice, and have experienced a lot of success with the bokeh levels in my pictures. So far, quite pleased with my purchase.
     
  21. fpnc macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #21

    Don't take this too harshly and I apologize for going completely off topic, but the need for your response to my post seems somewhat questionable since immediately following the sentence you isolated I go on to say:
    Thus, your entire response (counterpoint?) basically restated what I said in the very next sentence of my original post. I'm not trying to single you out and your other contributions to this thread were appreciated, but I do see this style of commenting fairly often here in MacRumors and I often wonder why it is even done.
     
  22. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #22
    You stated you didn't know why someone would want the 50mm over a 35mm on a crop body-- for me there are two main reasons, the first is doing single-person portraits, the second is being more telephoto oriented. So, in effect it was directed as an answer to "why" a 50mm would be preferred over a 35mm on an APS-C body.

    Besides restating the portrait option (because of other posters and the fact that it's one of the reasons I'd prefer a 50mm over a 35mm on a crop body) was that some people see more telephoto- I certainly shoot much more telephoto than wide angle, but I was also reinforcing the fact that some people are more "telephoto" than others- perhaps I should have expounded more upon that fact- your response basically takes the perspective (hehe) that you need to step back with a 50, where I more often find myself stepping forward with one- I'm just more telephoto than a lot of folks- I like detail and clear, simple images most of the time- which often means moving forward to isolate a subject and remove distracting elements in a potential image.

    If I have a 20-35mm on the camera, I'm at 35mm more often than not. But if I switch to a 35-70mm in front of the same scene, I'm more likely to go to 70mm than stay at 35mm. I'd rather stitch more 70mm shots than fewer 35mm shots for a pano too.

    Paul
     
  23. fpnc macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #23
    I started by saying "I'm not sure why..." and then went on to comment on the portrait and working distance issues which can favor either the 50mm OR the 35mm.
    I think you're still rehashing what I said in the entirety of my original post. Note my full statement about the "need to step back with a 50":
    Thus, I've already indicated that the difference in working distance between a 35mm and 50mm can either be an advantage or disadvantage (with added emphasis this time around). In effect, my first post already covered these issues. Lastly, note how I ended my original comments:
    Enough said, I think. ;)
     
  24. flosseR thread starter macrumors 6502a

    flosseR

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Location:
    the cold dark north
    #24
    Thanks for everyone's input. The 1.8 produces VERY nice pictures.. present was a huge success :)
     
  25. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #25
    Glad she's enjoying it!

    Paul
     

Share This Page