Lens choice? 50mm1.4 AIS vs. 50mm 1.4AFD vs. 50mm 1.8AFD

[bob_s__n.e._mass_]

I'm aware there has been discussion of the 50mm 1.4AFD vs. 50mm 1.8AFD but I

have a slightly different question. I have a 50mm 1.4AIS and could get a

Katzeye screen for my D200 to focus with it. Or I could sell it and get either

of the 50mm AFD lenses. Since I'm doing this to get a fast lens for low-light

situations, I'd likely go with the 50mm 1.4AFD. However, if the 1.8 AFD is

noticeably sharper than either 1.4 lenses I'd go with it. So here's my

question- given your experience, would you recommend the AIS/Katz eye route or

the 1.4 or 1.8 AFD lenses and why? Many thanks for your help in advance.

[jim_e.]

I don't think you can go wrong with any of those lenses. I think your on the right track with the 50mm 1.4 AF. If your shooting in low light you'll probably be thankful for the extra speed the 1.4 gives you. I like to manual focus so, personally, I would go with the AIS/Katz Eye. I'm too stubborn to give up turning that ring. I'm not sure which lens is sharper. I'm a speed freak, so even if the 1.8 is a little sharper, I'd still go with the 1.4.

[mawz]

I'd go with the AI-S, but I find the D200's stock screen to be more than adequate for a 50 f1.4.

[conrad_hoffman]

I have a f/1.4 AiS and D200, and have considered the Katz Eye. Focusing without it just isn't very precise. I don't think you'd see a difference in sharpness between the various lenses, but the difference in light gathering is worth considering. I posted about that a week or so ago. The question I'd have is, how good is the D200 focusing under low light conditions? If the AFD will always do the job, great, but if you're going to end up manual focusing much of the time, keep the AiS you already have. Alas, I don't have an answer for you.

[albertdarmali]

If you like manual focus, then you should keep the AIS and just get a Katz Eye I reckon. I know some people (maybe me included), if the condition allows it, prefers to manual focus using a solid lens rather than just doing auto focus (in this case with plastic lens).

 

When you take a nice picture using manual focus, I personally feels better and it feels more like I took this picture. I don't know, maybe it's just me and my little photography habit thing.

 

Good thing is D200 meters your AIS, because manual metering can be annoying.

[ajzammit]

I cannot really comment about the AIS lens, but i do have the 50mm f/1.8 and love it. But if you intend to use the lens in low light, the 1.4 will enable you to shoot at a significantly faster speed (the equivalent to 1 stop faster). There is no real point in having a sharp lens if you can?t freeze motion is there? I often which I had the 1.4 because of motion blur and camera shake. It's roughly at double the price, so you'll have to factor that in.

[wj_lee]

You can also get magnifying eyepiece DK 21M for easier focusing.

 

Don't think there is sharpness difference between 1.8 and 1.4. Some say 1.4 is sharper and some say 1.8 is sharper, it tends to depend on which lens they own. But for quick focusing AF is the best bet.

[jeff h.]

At f1.4, the 50/1.4 is sharper than the 50/1.8! ;)

[bob_s__n.e._mass_]

Jeff- which is sharper at f1.2? ;) ;) (wink wink, Monty Python and all that)! Thanks to all who've responded- I'm leaning towards trying the 1.4 AFD and comparing it to my 1.4 AIS.

[anthony_bez]

I would recommend the 50mm f1.4AFD you intend to try, it even has a reasonable manual focus feel. Forget about the myth of the f1.8 being sharper, it is just cheaper.

 

For an expert opinion try...http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

[charlie_johnson1]

I had a 50mm f1.8 AF Nikkor and sold it on Ebay to help pay for a 50mm f1.4AFD. I wish I still had my 1.8. I like the low light that the 1.4 gives me over the 1.8, but I saw that my 1.8 was sharper that the 1.4 I have now. I want my 1.8 back, but they are outragiously high on Ebay, used going for more than new alot of times. Too bad when I sold mine it didn't do that. If you can aford both, get them.

[bob_s__n.e._mass_]

Folks- please clarify- are these 50mm AFD lenses out of production (yet still listed on Nikon USA site) or just wildly popular and hard to get (like a number of other Nikon products)? I've got "notify when in stock" orders into 2 suppliers, so it appears they're still in production. I'll be patient if they're still produced. I'm not anxious enough to pay more on ebay than I'd pay for a new one!

[fred_bonnett2]

Nikon says the 50mm 1.8 is sharper than the 1.4. Compare the MTF graphs at Nikon's global site.

http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/af/normal/index.htm

[bodhisattvah]

This thread seems dead, but here's my two p anyway: I'm on my second 50/1.4

<br><br>

It's just that good. I AB-them and didn't see a huge difference in sharpness. There <i>is</i> however a distinct difference in build. I dropped my original sample so many times that I've cracked the barrel at the filter mount and chipped off a good portion of the aperture ring. That may make it sound flimsy, but it took several 4 foot drops onto concrete and some others thrown in for good measure to bust it up like that.

<br><br>

The build on the 50/1.8 seems flimsier and cheaper. True, you can buy two 1.8s for the price of a 1.4, but you could destroy two 1.8s and not have a working lens with the damage that my lens has taken.

<br><br>

I bought a used one in the box for $10 more than I purchased my original sample five years ago, but just as insurance, not because my old lens doesn't work. It's still sharp, it just won't take filters with much confidence.