 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 0
Looking into the primes to get for my D7100, and the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 is about 3x the price of the f1.8,
is it really that much better, i mean i could get the 35mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.8 and probably have some change...?
I'm a complete noob here so if it's a retarded question please be kind...
You know the saying, the only stupid question is the one you don't ask. I can only give you an opinion on the f1.8 which is a great lens as is the 35mm f1.8. Both sharp and great in low light. I guess it depends on what you want it for but for my needs the 1.8 is perfect. I'm sure more knowledgeable members can give you a more detailed comparison of their capabilities and differences.
Glenda
FWIW(from what I've seen and experienced) they're all good enough to allow the end user the opportunity to produce great images.
I have to be honest tho, and I love the Nikon 35/1.8 .. makes a great all round people lens I reckon(on Dx) .. BUT! I think you may be better off with the Sigma 30/1.4 for that sort of lens, and maybe get the 50/1.8 AF-S for slightly longer shots.
The f/1.4 lens is a lot better .. but this advantage is really only in the larger than f/1.8 aperture range!
The 2/3rd's of a stop difference can make a useful advantage, but in reality it's up to you if you're preference is for a single lens with wider aperture range options, or alternatively more lenses for more perspective variations!
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
The flipside being that if I don't answer I'll be stupid, so...Originally Posted by Lplates
Cools. The difference is half an f-stop. In practical terms, that like saying, "Oh, I'm forced to use 1/100sec instead of 1/160 second."
That's not even a doubling of exposure time. How much extra glass is there in the wider lens? 8mm more diameter.
The MAIN Q to ask then would become, "Which lens is significantly better in IQ at its widest - and for that matter, anywhere - stop?"
And that's for your purposes. OK, if you shoot stars at night AND the wider lens is just as good as the f/1.8, THEN MAYBE it's something to consider.
Am(pining).
Last edited by ameerat42; 21-07-2013 at 8:53pm.
CC, Image editing OK.
Threadstarter
sorry mate, i'm a bit confused...The flipside being that if I don't answer I'll be stupid, so...
Cools. The difference is half an f-stop. In practical terms, that like saying, "Oh, I'm forced to use 1/100sec instead of 1/160 second."
That's not even a doubling of exposure time. How much extra glass is there in the wider lens? 8mm more diameter.
The MAIN Q to ask then would become, "Which lens is significantly better in IQ at its widest - and for that matter, anywhere - stop?"
And that's for your purposes. OK, if you shoot stars at night AND the wider lens is just as good as the f/1.8, THEN MAYBE it's something to consider.
Am(
are the f/1.8 and f/1.4 similar in IQ? Or does one significantly out-do the other?
Looking at the sigma equivalent as well... but i'm still trying to get my head around the nikkor offerings and their
crazy naming/lettering...
An important question for you. What is the intended use for the 50mm. Portraits, streets, landscape, ?Looking into the primes to get for my D7100, and the Nikkor 50mm f1.4 is about 3x the price of the f1.8,
is it really that much better, i mean i could get the 35mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.8 and probably have some change...?
I'm a complete noob here so if it's a retarded question please be kind...
Luke. I cannot tell you about these two lenses, only about the difference in their light gathering ability.sorry mate, i'm a bit confused...
are the f/1.8 and f/1.4 similar in IQ? Or does one significantly out-do the other?
Looking at the sigma equivalent as well... but i'm still trying to get my head around the nikkor offerings and their
crazy naming/lettering...
You'd best google each one, like "nikon 50/1.8 vs nikon 50/1.4", and get a handle on what they reckon there.
I got this: http://photographylife.com/nikon-50mm-f1-8g-vs-f1-4g
but I haven't read it.
Alternatively, look on DP Review, Nikon Lenses, and compare the two side-by-side:
http://www.dpreview.com/products/Nikon/lenses
In addition (but wait, there's more) Google Flickr nikon 50/1.4 etc to see pictures taken with the lenses.
Am.
Threadstarter
hey mate,
sorry probably should have mentioned that, but all of the above...
i'll be travelling to tassy later this year and then relocating to England next year so i'll be photographing architecture, street, lanscape (sunsets/rises) and portraits/happy snaps...
currently i'm looking at the Nikkor 16 - 85mmf/3.5-5.6 and then these primes... I dare say i'll go with the f/1.8G's (both 50mm & 35mm) and then i'd like to get an UW like the sigma 10-20.. but that will be after the initial purchase...
cheers
Luke.
Hi Luke,
I have both the Nikon 35mm 1.8 and the older Nikon 50mm 1.8 D. On your DX camera 35mm is a great allround lens for street photography / architecture etc as being about a 50mm equivalent everything will "look right" to your eye. The 50mm is about right (probably technically a little short but I like it) for portraits.
I don't know much about the 16-85 but it generally reviews as a solid lens so probably ok for wider work. The Sigma 10-20 will perform well I expect.
If you want a very good DX lens that will cover most of those requirements on a budget the Taron 17-50 (either VC or not) is a well performing lens at a very good price point and being a f2.8 it's low light capability is also pretty good. It will balance nicely on your D7100 as well
Brenden
Last edited by bconolly; 22-07-2013 at 5:59pm.
Olympus OM-D EM-1, 12-40mm f2.8, 45mm f1.8, Panny 25mm f1.7
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Add To Bookmarks
