f1.4 or f1.8 as a first fast lens?

[bob_bill]

<p>Sorry, that was on a 70-200 at 180. </p>

[brian_banister]

<p>Hi everyone;<br>

I think that Megan is new to digital photography, not photography, according to what she says.<br>

Megan, I found my self here because I was in the same quandary as to whether to get the Nikon 1.4 or 1.8.<br>

Everyone has conflicting opinions;<br>

the 1.4 has: better build quality, better resolution, and of course better low-light functionality.<br>

Likewise, the 1.8 has: cheaper, but serviceable, build quality, also surprisingly ALSO has the better resolution of the two, and has normally serviceable low light functionality.<br>

I have bid on the 1.8 to the tune of $40 U.S. thus far (plus 8 postage), but if it nears the $90-100 average, I may end up going ahead and shooting the wad of $225 for the 1.4 just because I so often like to take casual shots just messing around the house with its subdued lighting.<br>

I'm strictly amateur, so I don't like the complexity of flash arrangements, so I figure the wider the aperture would probably be better for my use.<br>

Please let us know what you decide!<br>

P.S. I like your Twinings tea!</p>