AF speed 50mm/1.8G

<p>I find the autofocus speed of the 50mm/1.4G on my D700 hugely disappointing. Anyone knows how the new 50mm/1.8G compares?</p>

<p>I appreciate your view,</p>

<p>Jonas</p>

<p>It is more the camera that handles the auto-focus speed, and the camera does better when you have something <strong>with good contrast</strong> in your image selection. Photograph a newspaper front page, quick auto-focus speed will be noticed. Photograph a white wall (or an egg up close,) and your D700 may hunt a bit. ...not much to do with the lens.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>@Jerry<br>

The 50mm f/1.4G is not a fast lens...period.</p>

<p>@Jonas<br>

It seems the Nikon has tuned the AF motor in the new f/1.4G primes for precision, not speed. This lens, along with the 24mm, 35mm, and 85mm f/1.4G lenses can precisely AF wide open, something very rare. Even with my 85mm f/1.4D I find myself using Manual Focus to get exactly what I want in focus when wide open.</p>

<p>RS</p>

<p>If I remember correctly, someone complained that the new 50/1.4 AF-S lens was focusing slower than the old 50/1.4 AF lens. I am not sure about the 1.8 lens. I do not remember on what camera, as that would be important for the in-camera motor use versus the electric motor in the lens.<br />Perhaps someone remembers that discussion?</p>

<p>It is indeed the speed/precision trade-off. Different designs behave diffently. Having been happy with the AF performance on Sigma's 30/1.4 HSM, I gave their 50/1.4 HSM a try along side Nikon's 50/1.4 G. Leaving aside the optical differences, which are qualitatively significant at different apertures/distances, the HSM was a <em>lot</em> faster than the G. Really noticeable. It really helps to mount up both designs and actually experience the difference.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I own the 50mm f1.4 AF Nikkor and I can't think of anything I ever use it for where I NEED a fast AF. Just usually protraits, etc. I use my 80-200 and other lenses for action sports and they AF plenty fast.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi Jonas,<br /> I used to have a 50/1.4 G on my D700 and I was very disappointed... and finally I changed to a Sigma 50/1.4 which I like very much. Since Sigma is quite bulky I felt the need to get a smaller/lightweight 50 for street/travel every day use and I took the 50/1.8 G.<br /> Honestly maybe I am biased by my old feelings regarding 50/1.4 G but IMHO the new lens, apart of not covering f1.4 - f1.8 area, it is superior to the 50/1.4 G in every single point. The bokeh is nice wide open, its AF is fast (not a speed daemon though), quiet and very precise, the colors are rendered in a natural pleasant way and the build quality is not bad at all... Again, maybe I am biased by my unhappy experience with 50/1.4 G... maybe I had a crappy 50/1.4 and now a great copy of 50/1.8... I dunno... but certainly I am very happy with this new lens.</p>

<p>If you need the fastest AF you need a faster AF lens. When I received it I was also impressed on how slow the AF is on the 50/1.4, after several weeks using it I was impressed on how accurate it was... it`s not an excuse; obviously I `d like it faster, or why not, <em>the fastest</em>.</p>

<p>Now I think it`s fast enough for (most of) my needs, and I`m used to it and to this behaviour, working accordingly. Only a very few times (the latest, yesterday) I found it to be slow enough to loose a shot; I only loose two images, out of 200 (the third one in the burst was in perfect focus).</p>

<p>Anyway, if I need the fastest AF, I use to need/like also zooming ability, and why not, the highest IQ along the range. I should take then a 24-70, not the 50.</p>

<p>interestingly enough, i shot a live performance with the 24-70 along with the sigma 50/1.4 on a D3s. fairly dim nightclub lighting, ISOs from 2500-4000 and shutter speeds from 1/125-1/200. the 24-70 locked focus much faster than the 50. of course the 50 is much better at f/2 than the 24-70, and does very well in less challenging conditions.</p>

<p>I prefer the slower, smooth AF of the F1.4G over the torquey, quick AF of the Sigma. But I'm weird.</p>

<p>The F1.8G feels a tad quicker but still retains that smooth and accurate AF tracking. It's the best AF'er of the three IMO.</p>

<p>Actually, with it's svelte size, no nonsense price, and more than decent performance it's the best of the three. Again IMO.</p>

 

<p>I have just received a 50mm/f1.8 AF-S sample from Nikon USA to write a review on photo.net. (This is my full disclosure: Clearly Nikon's objective to help themselves market their lens, but so far nobody has told me that I can only make positive comments on that lens or for that matter on any Nikon equipment. And I am writing this up-coming review strictly as a volunteer on photo.net; I am not paid for the review.)</p>

<p>The new 50mm/f1.8 AF-S has an all-plastic barrel construction and therefore very light weight; however, the lens mount is metal. In that sense it is like the FX version of the highly popular 35mm/1.8 AF-S DX. The 50mm/f1.4 AF-S has a similar construction but clearly heavier due to the larger lens elements for f1.4. For these small lenses, I think a plastic barrell is just fine. All three of these lenses are made in Nikon's factory in China. The 50mm/f1.8 AF-S uses 58mm filter size, which is odd for Nikon.</p>

<p>I tried the 50mm/f1.8 AF-S on my D700 (FX format) a bit. Even at f1.8, image sharpness seems quite good and AF speed is satisfactory; I certainly do not feel that it is slow, which I did feel on the 50mm/f1.4 AF-S earlier (but unfortunately I don't have the f1.4 any more for a side-by-side comparison). Please consider these very preliminary comments. The D700 is of course not as demanding on lenses as something with very high pixel density such as the DX-format D7000.</p>

<p>I'll try this lens out thoroughly in the coming month on various bodies and will provide more details later on.</p>

<p>Thanks Shun, it will be very interesting!</p>