Nikkor 50mm 1.2 v 1.8

Associate
Joined
7 Jan 2007
Posts
640
Location
Cambridge
Anyonw have any experience with the old Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AIs? I've spotted one for a decent price price but I'm wondering if its worth the extra £200 over the 1.8 version. I know I'll have to meter manually but that doesn't bother me, I'm starting to do that more and more myself anyway.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,662
If you're happy spending £200 over the price of the f1.8 DX lens then why not go for the f1.4 DX lens?

The f1.4 is supposed to be better build quality and better glass than the f1.8 plus you get to keep AF and metering.

Just a thought :)

Panzer
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2003
Posts
11,890
Location
Northamptonshire
The 1.8 will be cheap as chips, and will make a good solid lens in your line up. I imagine a 50mm 1.8 AIS goes for less than £40, given a new AF one is £80?

The 1.2 is over a stop faster. Its a whole different kettle of fish I would think. With an aperture of 1.2 you are looking at more of a 'pro' lens. RRP appears to be ~£500, which is very different from £40-£80!!! It's Nikon's fastest ever glass.

It really depends what you want to use this lens for and how serious you are about it.


Edit: Panzerbjorn, did you mean to write DX?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,662
Oops my mistake!

Sorry all, I thought the Nifty Fifty f1.8 and f1.4 were both designed for digital bodies :o

If that's the case:

If you think you can stretch to the price of the f1.2 then do it.
Most people ask about which is better the 1.8 or the 1.4 and the general advice is if you can afford the extra for improved build quality and glass of the 1.4 the do it. If you can get a 1.2 within your budget then go for it.

My apologies again for being a bit dim.

Panzer
 
Associate
OP
Joined
7 Jan 2007
Posts
640
Location
Cambridge
I hadn't really considered the 1.4, I was looking at getting the 1.8 and a SB600 flashgun when I stumbled across the 1.2.

At £240 its a little more than I was looking to pay for gear at the minute but from what I've seen so far its a great lens and supreamly fast and to be honest I would probably get more use out of it than the flashgun. Still have a few days to decide...
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,662
Check out Strobis (if you haven't already) and read the Flash 101. It's a long read but very interesting and has really encouraged me to start using my flash more often!

Panzer
 
Associate
Joined
21 Feb 2004
Posts
886
As were on the subject of 50mm I might look at getting one. What’s the difference between Nikon 50 f1.8 D Lens and Nikon 50mm f1.8 Nikkor A

Is the 1.8 worth it as I cant afford the 1.4 now, is there a massive noticeable difference with the picture quality and am I able to use it for macro?
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2003
Posts
11,890
Location
Northamptonshire
ICE Master said:
As were on the subject of 50mm I might look at getting one. What’s the difference between Nikon 50 f1.8 D Lens and Nikon 50mm f1.8 Nikkor A

Is the 1.8 worth it as I cant afford the 1.4 now, is there a massive noticeable difference with the picture quality and am I able to use it for macro?
The 1.8 is definitely worth getting if you want sharp, low-light performance. The 'D' version is the one to go for, as it transmits distance information to the camera which helps for metering purposes.

You can use it for macro but only if you get some extension tubes (the Kenko ones are reasonably inexpensive)

HTH :)
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2003
Posts
11,890
Location
Northamptonshire
ICE Master said:
do you have any examples of the 1.8 in action? Im thinking of portrait pictures i think i will use it for
Not really Im afraid. I dont tend it use mine all that much, as it doesnt really fit with most of what I shoot.

I did a portrait with it a while ago, but its not worth posting due to camera shake (shot at 1/20th :p).

It's generally very good for portraits I understand (esp on a DSLR), and even more so that it only costs £80! :D
 
Associate
Joined
7 Jul 2006
Posts
1,047
Location
Stoke on Trent
Isnt the AIS range manual focus


so, I would say that whilst the 1.2 aperature would make for a great lens, are your eyes good at manual focusing.


I dont mean that to be insulting, but I have seen people take pictures with a manual focus that look great to them, but to other people the focus is just that little bit off.

50mm manual nikon lenses sell for virtually nothing on the usual web based auction site, not sure about a 1.2 one though
 
Permabanned
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Posts
12,434
Location
Southampton University
ICE Master said:
do you have any examples of the 1.8 in action? Im thinking of portrait pictures i think i will use it for


DSC_5919-01-BW-E-S.jpg


DSC_5855-01-S3.jpg
 
Associate
Joined
1 Feb 2006
Posts
2,183
Location
London
I found the 50mm isn't great for group shots as it isn't wide enough (unless you get really far back), depending on what the composition is of course.

Here are a load I've taken with the Nikon 50mm f1.8:
463058045_9460da2cbd_o.jpg


Opps, I guess you can do groups: http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertgilbert86/460462486/in/set-72157594228115838/

Browse my flickr here http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertgilbert86/sets/72157594228115838/ . All the gig photos (except the fisheye ones) are from the 50mm.

I reckon it's a great lens. and you don't really need f1.2. Spend the money on a 28 or 30mm prime instead, it'd make a great travel lens.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Jul 2004
Posts
103
Location
Somerset UK
CPs are always nice to have as an option, but I would guess you would be doing more portrait stuff with the 50mm so not sure it's essential. A UV/protection filter is always a good idea.

I was given a 50mm f/1.8 for my birthday yesterday, I love it, it is so easy to work with, I'm a total noob at photography, but I am already enjoying the results from this lens.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Apr 2007
Posts
348
Location
Hertfordshire
The 1.2 lens is a fantastic bit of glass but it has to be looked at as something of an indulgence; but what an indulgence!! If it is in good condition it is worth every penny of whatever they want for it. You will not believe how bright your viewfinder will be and how positive it is to focus due to the tiny depth of field when wide open. The build quality was second to none as it was one of the flagship lenses of the range.

I have never really thought of 50mm as a portrait lens - if you cen get your hands on one and don't mind manual focus, try the classic Nikkor 105mm f/2.5. This is more flattering then the 50mm when you fill the frame with the face and much less intrusive as you don't have to get so close. While we are talking about indulgence, if you want a real portrait lens then hunt down a Nikkor 105mm f/1.8s. You can't have mine though, I would sooner sell you my children ;)
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
31 Jul 2004
Posts
103
Location
Somerset UK
I guess it depends on if you are shooting full frame or not, on the consumer Nikon DSLRs 50mm give the equivalent of a 75mm whilst 105mm is more like 160mm, I find the 105mm good for candids, but it's too long in the confines of an average lounge. I guess an 85mm would be a good compromise.

105mm Nikkor f/2.8:

Chard%20Easter%20015%20(Medium).jpg


50mm Nikkor f/1.8:

gus%20006%20(Medium).jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom