CA of 50/1.8 and 35/2 lenses?

[fju]

<p>I'm switching from Canon to Nikon and I'd like some opinions on my 2 lens choices. I prefer normal lenses, so I may start with the 50/1.8D and the 35/2D.</p>

<p>Are these 2 lenses a good choice as far as avoiding chromatic aberration is concerned? I mostly shoot fashion so sharpness and contrast are not my most important factors. I mainly want to avoid CA at larger apertures. I shoot quite a lot at f/2 in bright sunlight.</p>

 

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>wide open in bright sunlight will make for some aberration with any lens, will it not?</p>

<p>My 50 f/1.8 is, however, VERY good in this area!</p>

<p>What body are you using? And why switch? Canon makes great cameras!</p>

[hans_janssen]

<p>What are normal lenses?????????</p>

[dcphotography]

<p>I find that my 50mm f/1.8D is good at controlling CA after f/2.2 or so. My 35mm f/2 Nikkor-Q is good at controlling it after f/2.8, I don't know about the 35mm f/2D (different optical designs).</p>

[astral]

<p>Have a look at <a href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests">www.photozone.de</a> - these lenses are reviewed there, with CA charts, etc (on an APS-C camera).</p>

[Two23]

<p>I've had trouble with my 50mm f1.8 and CA, have not owned the 35m f2. All in all I think the 50mm f1.8 is over rated. I bought a Simga 30mm f1.4 and love it. If I were buying a 50mm f1.4 I'd also buy the Sigma as it too gets stellar reviews. I honestly believe that Sigma produces the best product with these two specific lenses. The reviews I've seen say that the Nikon 35mm f1.8G beats the older 35mm f2 in image quality, and the Sigma 30mm f1.4 beats both of them. Keep in mind the lenses you mention are a 20 yr. old design and don't have the newer coatings or computerized lens design etc. There have been some signifcant advances in lenses since those were made, just as there has been with cameras.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[fju]

<p>I forgot to mention that I shoot film. <br>

Peter, I was given an F50 as a gift and I love the size of the viewfinder magnification. It's a .78 pentaprism and my Canon camera has a .70 pentamirror. I only own one Canon lens so it's not a big deal for me to switch.</p>

<p>David, thanks.</p>

<p>Alan, according to your link the 50/1.8D exhibits a lot of CA. The 50/1.4D is better but still not great for a prime. Does anyone know what the best Nikkor 50mm lens is if CA is the main concern? Perhaps if I look at the non 'D' versions?</p>

[mfophotos]

<p>Use a lens hood. I think people stress too much about these purported CA problems.</p>

[epp_b]

<p>Just thought I'd add that, if you're using a DX frame (APS-C, 1.5 crop), consider the 35/1.8 G. It's a fantastic little lens.</p>

<p>It feels just like a 50/1.8 on full frame.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>I have the 35 f/2 D, but I use it on digital, so on film it may behave a bit different when it comes to CA. The lens is not free of it, but it's not a very big problem unless shooting against harsh lights. Nothing to worry about, in my view. With digital, it takes "pixelpeeping" to see it, which means it is not a real-world problem. Not very likely you will notice it on prints.<br /> However, wide open, the lens is not all that spectacular, I think. Closed to ~f/2.8, it's a very nice lens, but below that, it's a bit soft and not very contrasty.</p>

<p>I've got the 50 f/1.8D too, and I never saw much CA with it, but I've never used it in conditions where CA is all that likely. However, for the money, it's a "can't miss option".</p>

[mark_crown2]

<p>Hi Francisco</p>

<p>I too use film. I use the AF 35/2 lens - the version before the D release - on my FM3a/FM2n, F3 and FE. I think that this is a very sharp lens and is perfectly useable at full open aperture. It is also good in that it is very close focussing. In terms of CA, I never noticed any of this on my slides - I don't see any halo effect on prints from slides around branches or faces that you get on many digital pictures. My AF 35mm f2 is sharp in the centre wide open and less sharp in the corners - but I have to look really hard to see this. <br />I think that pictorially, it creates attractive images - there is also some barrel distortion that increase as you get closer to the subject - even the much vaunted AIS 28mm 2.8 does that though.</p>

<p>Hope this helps,</p>

<p>Mark</p>