PDA

View Full Version : 50mm 1.4 or 1.8

rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 20:28
For the price difference, Is it worth investing in the 1.4 over the 1.8 It seems like ALOT more expensive for such a small difference or does it make a huge difference? Really want one but seems alot more to pay for the 1.4.

Thanks!
fontmoss
31-03-2009, 20:30
if you're not sure then prob not worth it. Might be worth playing about with dif focal lengths too, 50 is standard from film cameras, on a crop sensor its more like 75 so a 35 would be equivalent to 50 on film camera.


clear as mud.
rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 20:33
It will be used on my Nikon D40. So 50mm best?
Sam_G
31-03-2009, 20:38
It may be best to look at the new 35mm f1.8 on a D40 as it will retain autofocus. The 50mm f1.8 will not autofocus on a D40, nor will the 50mm f1.4D. The 50mm f1.4 AF-S will though.
andyred
31-03-2009, 20:42
For the price difference, Is it worth investing in the 1.4 over the 1.8 It seems like ALOT more expensive for such a small difference or does it make a huge difference? Really want one but seems alot more to pay for the 1.4.

Thanks!

Hi in the recent photo mag I get, they have just done a piece on this and it basically if you can afford the extra money the 1.4 was the better lens and a better made lens, but if finances are restrictive, the 1.8 was a very good lens

Hope this helps :thumbs:
rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 20:43
Wanted to keep autofocus so going to have to end up skint or wait a long time. and get this 35mm 1.8 AF-S.

Or the 1.4 AF-S which is not going to be possible and would rather save for a new camera if i was spending that much on a lens!
Wail
31-03-2009, 20:56
Puddleduck has one AF-S 50 f/1.4 up for sale.

Check the For Sale forums and you'll see it.

It's a wonerful lens, and the price PD is asking is a real bargain.
rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 21:23
I would get it if i had the money Shame i dont :(!
jonnypb
31-03-2009, 21:48
I would get it if i had the money Shame i dont :(!

I think you've answered your own question ;)

I've had experience with the canon 1.8 and 1.4 and settled with the 1.4. I found it to be sharper, faster AF and more accurate and better built but like you know it's more expensive
rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 21:56
Might be worth saving up then! Or just saving up for a D300 if bodys make that much of a difference
Wail
31-03-2009, 22:14
Never put a camera body before a lens! Bodies never last as long, and don't hold value anywhere as good as a lens.
rtjdesign
31-03-2009, 22:37
Right Lens it is!
fontmoss
01-04-2009, 07:33
why dont you play around longer, seems like you're not sure what you want. get a 50mm 1.8 or borrow one if you can and give it a month or so, there's no rush
sdb123
01-04-2009, 08:53
why dont you play around longer, seems like you're not sure what you want.

Pot....kettle....black....:D
dore187
01-04-2009, 12:14
ive heard the 1.8 is better than the 1.4 i think ken rockwell said it
im not sure if its true or not
i own the 1.8 and its great
Wail
01-04-2009, 12:41
You can't fault the f /1.8 .. given the price of that thing and its versatility ... it's a no-brainer must-have in any kit!

Coupled with an extention tube and you've got a good macro; with a reversing ring, and it's a sexy exotic toy; on it's own on a cropped sensor and its good for portraits. Any which way you look at it, that lens is a must have.
Nod
01-04-2009, 13:01
I've seen comparisons made between the f/1.4 and the f/1.8 where the only benefit from the faster lens is the extra shallow DoF. Once the lenses are in the comfort zone (stopped down to f/2 or smaller rather than wide open) you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference, although some people say the f/1.8 is marginally sharper.

Given that the D40 needs the latest AF-S f/1.4 to retain AF (or the possibly better Sigma version), I would go for that since MF on a plain ground screen with a very shallow DoF isn't going to be easy! Not a cheap option though!!!