50mm f/1.4 D AF made in Japan

[erik_christensen3]

I have just been offered a 50mm f/1.4 D AF made in Japan - plastic so very light and pictures are sharp and AF

quick. Intend to use it for: available light portrait/people of the street/landscapes. According to the seller: nearly new,

which I doubt when made in Japan (I cannot find a serial no.) what is the normal value of such a lens?

[Michael R Freeman]

"Nearly new" to most sellers means hardly used. So it could have certainly been purchased a few years ago when

this model was still made in Japan, and spent more time on the shelf than on a camera.

 

The serial number is on the aperture ring, 180 degrees opposite the f/stop numbers. It is laser etched, black on

black in small numerals. A magnifying lamp is a definite asset to first find it, then read it, if your eyes are

not so young anymore. See here for the serial number range for made in Japan and made in China versions.

 

Check e-B-a-y completed auctions to get an idea of the normal market value for this lens. Or check KEH.com to

find the top range.

[photo5]

Must have been made *quite* a few years ago as I bought a 50mm f1.4 AF-D lens as-new in 2002, which I sold later.

 

I've never been impressed with this lens. I bought the AIS version more recently and it just didn't impress me as sharper than the f1.8 version. I honestly don't know what all the hype is. The f1.8 version is just as good in my book, and a whole lot less expensive.

[Michael R Freeman]

Forgot the link to Roland's s/n page: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#50fast

[erik_christensen3]

Michael - thank you for the link - it is most likely from 2004 based on the serial no., which I found by using a magnifying glass - you are right my eyes are not what they used to be.

Price here (VN) ok compared with KEH and no shipping costs.

[jose_angel]

Dave, I agree. My 50/1.4 AiS version is one of the softest lenses I owned. My 50/1.8 AFD, one of the sharpest. Michael, astoundingly useful link, thanks.

[sngreen]

Mine was made in China and I bought it almost 2 years ago brand new. I agree it is softish wide open but gets very good past f/2.8 and on. Stop it down to f/2 at least if you want to have both worlds from it.

 

<P>Although I do not use it much for me it is much worth the price. Chinese build of course leaves something to be desired, I'd much rather have it made in Japan.

 

<P>This is wide open (on D300),

 

<P>

<IMG SRC="http://i.pbase.com/o4/83/694283/1/99536052.5bU0tezd.JulyDSC_6937_FR_.jpg"><BR><BR>

 

<P>Stopped down to f/2.2 (on D200)

 

<P><IMG SRC="http://i.pbase.com/o6/83/694283/1/78453558.EdD2J5mj.JPGDSC_0587_FR_.jpg"><BR><BR>

 

<P>Stopped down to f/4 (D200), sharp across the frame,

 

<P><IMG SRC="http://i.pbase.com/o6/83/694283/1/78453557.kKXAJ9i9.JPGDSC_0585_FR_.jpg">

 

 

<P>-Sergey

[ronald_moravec1]

The 50 .18 AF D is a sharper lens than my 50 1.4. and is more flare free. Professional reviews have always said this about the

Nikon 50 way back to 1960.

[pisq]

I'm sorry those pictures are not showing up. I generally agree that at f2 and smaller apertures the 50 f/1.4 seems as sharp

and the 50 f/1.8 (MF which is what I own), but flare can be a constant danger.

[dan_brown4]

Consider this: My 50/1.4 had a "Made in Thailand" sticker on it. When I peeled it off, there was "Made in Japan" engraved on

the lens.

[Sanford]

I'd rather have a new made in China or Taiwan with a five year warranty than a used made in Japan lens. I don't trust lenses with electronics inside

and need that five year warranty with my luck.

[robert_hooper1]

I have Nikon lenses that I purchased from 1967, thru 2008, so I feel qualified to make an observation. Lenses made in

Japan are better made, and are more reliable right out of the box. I would rather have a lens made in Japan by labor that

has some clue as to what photography is all about. I worked nights as a bartender in college, but I was a terrible bartender

because I don't drink hard liquor and have no idea how the drinks I mixed were supposed to taste. The deli in my local

supermarket here in Hawaii is staffed by people who don't eat sandwiches and consequently the sandwiches they make are

terrible. The same thing is going on today with Nikon equipment, in my opinion. It is made in factories by labor who don't

have a clue.

[pisq]

I think (and I have seen it at Photo.net in other discussions) that factory tolerances being what they are today, it should not

matter if it's made in Japan or any other place. If Nikon is serious about their quality, then they will have strict factory and

process controls to control quality wherever the lenses are assembled.

[robert_hooper1]

"If Nikon is serious about their quality, then they will have strict factory and process controls to control quality wherever the

lenses are assembled."

 

From your lips to Michio Kariya's ears

[sngreen]

<br /><p><em>The 50 .18 AF D is a sharper lens than my 50 1.4. and is more flare free.

Professional reviews have always said this about the Nikon 50 way back to 1960.</em><br />

<br />

<br />

Ronald, I am not so sure. It is sharper when both compared at wide open. But if

you compare them at the same settings it may not be quite so. In fact more like

the opposite is true. Compare here f/8 on 1.8 version against f/2 on 1.4 version,<br />

<br />

<a

href="http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/46-nikon--nikkor-aps-c/218-nikkor-ai-s-50mm-f18-review--lab-test-report?start=1">

50/1.8</a><br />

<br />

<a

href="http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/46-nikon--nikkor-aps-c/216-nikkor-af-50mm-f14-d-review--lab-test-report?start=1">

50.1.4</a><br />

<br />

Not a statement, just an observation. I see very often wider aperture range lenses do get lower ratings in

reviews and comparisons. Comparing these same lenses at the same settings often reveals that they are in fact

better than their higher scoring rivals.

<br />

<br />

- Sergey

[aidy_ledgard]

just my two cents on where things in general are made these days,

 

The point of the matter is not just build quality but how much the workers are getting paid who are putting the things together.The workers in places like china and india etc. are being paid peanuts whilst the consumers in the west are paying top dollar in general.

 

Take the d300 for example,look what we are being charged! i wouldn't have minded paying the amount if it had been made in japan!

 

Another example is rolls royce,when the company was British,(don't get me started on that one) let's say they decided to build them in china, who in their right minds would want to buy one? -rolls royce-made in china, sounds lovely doesn't it?

 

Things should be made in their original place of manufacture and if you can't afford the product,tough.

to me, a product is 'cheapened' if it isn't made in it's original country.

[bmm]

I am only a relative 'newbie' photographer, but I am a 15+ year experienced industrial economist in an ultra-high tech sector (aerospace). And with that I feel qualified to say to you, aidy ledgard, that you have to be kidding me.

 

That kind of populist (and naive) protectionist thinking is coming close to being half a century or more old. And in reality, when disaggregated, almost every advanced product has componentry, or labour, from all corners of the globe. Nikon is a brand under which complex systems are designed and integrated/assembled. If it chooses to manufacture all or part of a product in a particular country, it takes the reputational risk if things go pear-shaped. But I do not prima-facie devalue Nikon, or any other brand, brand due to country of manufacture... that is plain stupid.

 

Onto the 50/1.4, I had one delivered from B&H 6 months ago and it is made in Thailand. With the caveat that I use it in DX format, I have found it very nice and sharp anywhere over f/2.8. And below that, who cares as edge sharpness is not what anyone is trying to achieve when shooting wide-open. While I've come to prefer the 35 and 85 focal lengths, I'm really pleased with the lens when I use it.

[bmm]

I should clarify... by "half a century or more old" what I really mean is half a century or more out-of-date, discredited, or obsolete.

[aidy_ledgard]

Bernard Mills, basically what's going on these days is manufacturers thinking of ways in which they can make more profit and unfortunately this means making/assembling products in countries with cheap labour which also means EXPLOITING the workers. It's a fact fella. When doc martin boots-to give an example- were made in u.k. they we x amount of pounds,when they were then made in CHINA the price of the boot was still the same despite them being made for LESS.It's all about greed.Not only that it's doing workers over here out of jobs.

 

I can see where you are coming from regarding if a product is made well then it shouldn't matter where it's made but like i say, you ask a true rolls royce enthusiast if they'd buy a rolls MADE IN CHINA as opposed to one MADE IN ENGLAND and i'm sorry but they'd agree with me. it's about principles.