| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/15/2005 11:31:18 AM · #1 |
Does any know how much of a difference this makes? I mostly interested in low light indoors not depth of field.
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 11:34:17 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 11:37:00 AM · #3 |
I have the 50mm 1.8, very sharp.
//www.photozone.de/
They have a rating system on here and they finish very close. 1.8 is also cheap, 1.4 has a better build quality.
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 11:48:07 AM · #4 |
| Are they both FAST... is one Faster??? |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 11:53:18 AM · #5 |
THe 1.8 1.4 and 1.0 are the maximum F-Stops.
The lower the number, the wider the internal diaphragm opens. the more it opens, the more light can get in.
So, the larger the aperture the 'faster' the lens...BUT the less depth of field one will have at that larger opening. Also, the difference between 1.8 and 1.4 is very small, less than 1 stop.
One other advantage is that the larger the opening, the more light is let in for seeing the subject before taking the shot (for focusing or framing the shot, etc) so even if you plan to take the shot at F11, having an F1.8 will giver you a much brighter image in the viewfinder.
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 11:54:23 AM · #6 |
By coincidence, I read a review this morning on //www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm for both and this guy seems to like more the older 1.8. Better built and totally worth its price.
Hope this helps |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 12:13:52 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by spaque99:
By coincidence, I read a review this morning on //www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm for both and this guy seems to like more the older 1.8. Better built and totally worth its price.
Hope this helps |
Go ahead, confuse the new guy...
Canon made a 50mm 1.8 10 or so years ago, mostly metal. These are avaiable used for $100 or so. The one canon now sells is referred to as the Mark II, and is moslty plastic and is available new for $75.
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 12:16:30 PM · #8 |
I have the 1.8. Best $100 I've spent on a photo equipment. Pin sharp and fast, and about 1/3 price of the 1.4. The focal length (equivalent of 75mm on the D70) is nice for portraits, although it is almost too sharp for skin tones
Message edited by author 2005-03-15 12:17:13. |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:13:41 PM · #9 |
Another difference between the two is that the 1.4 has better bokeh than the 1.8, due to the number of leaves (I believe 8 vs. 6??) on the iris. More leaves on the 1.4 means more circular (vs. hexagonal) OOF cirles.
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:18:26 PM · #10 |
I have had both of these lenses and used them both quite a bit.
The 50mm f/1.4 has the micro-USM focusing motor which isn’t quite as fast as the higher end USM lenses but it does still offer full time manual focusing (unlike the other micro USM lenses). The 50mm f/1.8 II has the older DC motor.
The f/1.4 also has more diaphragm blades (8 vs 5 if I recall correctly) so it should have nicer bokeh when stopped down though I never really noticed the difference very much in my pictures.
The build quality of the 50mm f/1.4 is better than the f/1.8 II but to me it still isn’t all that great. The f/1.8 has a plastic mount while the f/1.4 has a metal mount. I have never found the plastic mount to be a problem at all. The original 50mm f/1.4 that I had fell out of my lap while sitting in my car and hit a concrete driveway. The lens didn’t look like it was in very bad condition so I sent it in to Canon. They told me it was more expensive to fix it than it was to buy a new one and refused to repair it. I don’t think the f/1.8 would have done any better but for be build quality on either lens isn’t all that great.
The 50mm f/1.4 does have a distance window that the f/1.8 doesn’t have if that is something you actually use (I don’t).
I found the 50mm f/1.4 to be not all that sharp wide open but it is still usable when you really need the shot. The 50mm f/1.8 that I had was pretty decent wide open and was about the same as the 50mm f/1.4 was at f/1.8.
Some people like the manual focus ring on the 50mm f/1.4 better than that of the f/1.8 and I tend to agree. The focus ring on the f/1.8 is a bit awkward to use.
In the end I sold my f/1.4 and kept the f/1.8 which I eventually gave away. They are both nice lenses.
Tom
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:25:15 PM · #11 |
| you are not even getting a stop difference between the lenses, so for low light they are virtually the same, but the price is much different. I have the 1.8 and I love it. |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:27:53 PM · #12 |
You do get 2/3 of a stop which can be significant but I agree the f/1.8 II is a better value for the money by a lot.
Tom
|
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:40:01 PM · #13 |
|
|
|
03/15/2005 01:55:51 PM · #14 |
Thast kinda funny you can almost see the five blades in the back lights.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/25/2025 12:13:13 PM EST.
