MF or AF 50mm for F100

[sam_portera]

I have and 18-35, 80-200, 85 f1.8, and a 28-105mm (my general purpose

snap shot lens) I am looking to add a 50mm. What would be the best

value in MF or AF lenses. I had the 50mm F1.8 AF but I did not like

its build quality. I much prefer the build quality of the AIS lenses

with their all metal construction. It seems that I can pick up a

F1.4 AIS lens much cheaper, are they much different from the AF

Nikkors.

[juan_su]

Hi Sam,

 

I can't really comment much on the AIS lenses, but I did recently purchase the 50mm AF 1.8D and I have to pretty much agree with many of the rave reviews people have been saying about that lens. Yes, it is plastic but for a lens that fast and sharp and costing $100. I think it's fine. But your dependence on build quality may vary. All the best

[steve_muntz]

I don't think that there are any bad 50mm Nikkors, they're all very good optically. If you don't like the build quality of the AF-D f1.8, then look at the f1.4 - it's built like most other primes. I have the 50 f1.4 AF (non-D which is built about the same as AF-D) and it's built very well. It has more plastic in it than the f1.4 AI that I used to have, but that's typical. I don't think there's any difference in function between AI and AIS on an F100 and I'm sure a 50mm f1.4 AI will be less money.

 

I would stick with an AF lens to get all of the features of the F100, like matrix metering. I bought the f1.4 over the f1.8 for the extra 2/3 stop because I do a lot of low-light work. If you don't need the extra 2/3 stop, then the f1.8 could be replaced twice and you would have still spent less than the price of the f1.4.

[jemini_joseph]

I've used 50mm f/1.4 AIS for almost 3 years and once compared that to AF 1.4 and I thought the AIS was shaper. I didn't do any scientific tests. Anyway I can guarantee you that it won't be inferior.

<br><br>

Good luck <br>

<a href="http://www.wildbackyard.com" target="w-2">www.wildbackyard.com</a>

[david_h._hartman]

The AF 50/1.8 (non-D) that I had was nearly impossible to

focus manually as it had it had slight binding in the focus and

the throw on the focus very fast. However it gave no problems

with auto focus.<br>

<br>

If you plan to use manual focus much of the time Id buy a

50/1.8 AI or AIS (early) Nikkor. If you want to use AF, say with

flash in low light, then Id get a 50/1.4 AF-D. In theory

this is what I own. In practice my 50/1.4 is an AIS. Yes, I need

several 50mm lenses as there really are important differences. <br>

<br>

So what do you need? Do you need to focus manually, focus

automatically, or both? Let you need be your guide.<br>

<br>

The 50/1.4 AIS, AF and AF-D all have the same optical formula.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[cooper8168]

I'm with you re: the build quality. I've had the AF 1.8 for quite a while and it's fantastic if

you don't ever have to touch it. Everything on our website was shot with that lens

(www.kalehandbags.com). But I recently started getting back into AI(S) lenses for my

FM3a and there is nothing like the feel of the MF lenses. I can't tell the difference between

the AF and the MF in terms of sharpness, but if I had to make a choice in that regard, I'd

probably choose the MF. Feel is very important to me.

[harvey_edelstein1]

If you go to Photodo the F1.8 50 has the higher rating and you can look at the test numbers. It gets high marks on photozone.de so I think it will give you the best image. I have lots of metal lenses and they are prone to getting dents that a good polymer lens would bounce back from and not show any wear. Corian is popular because it doesn't show wear and scratches don't show since the finish goes staight thru the material, good PVC lenses when scrached don't show the finish is rubbed off like many black metal lenses do. As mentioned previously the F1.8 is so cheap that even if it got damaged it would be cheaper to replace it and still save money.

If you give up the AF then you don't get the most out of the F100 and

in what situation if that important enough to do.

[saikat.pathak]

If you want to focus manually, buy the manual focus lens. If you use autofocus most of the time, the AFD version is fine. I chose the MF version as I focus manually. Instead of build quality, the purpose should be deciding factor.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"In theory this is what I own." --DHH<br>

</em><br>

I must have meant in addition to the two MF 50mm lenses I own. Ive

thought of adding a AF 50/1.4D but for now there is little chance.

Anyway I have no plan or desire to sell my 50/1.4 AIS.

[elliot]

Its harder to focus manually on the AF screens. I'd go for the AF if you're using an F100. Glass quality should be mostly if not exactly the same, but I'd go for the AF for the AF and metering capabilities. I think its worth the extra $. If you only shot manual focus cameras, I'd say that the AIS is a better bed - its better built and less expensive.

[alistair o]

I vote for the 1.8 AF-D. Cheap, quality optics and the plastic takes the knocks. In fact it is as tough as old boots.