Convince me to buy a nifty fifty

[tommo]

I really want to get some nice portrait shots, and am looking at a Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF.

Has anyone got any examples of portraits taken with a 18-55 lens and the same shot with a 50mm 1.8? Would be handy to see the difference :thinking:

[Diego Garcia]

Tommo,

Its not about seeing the difference. The 1.8 is inherently faster than the 18-55 lens, which means it will let more light onto the sensor. As such, it is a better lens in low light -or faster as it is known. Also, the depth of field that 1.8 affords is magical and will allow you to create some well cool shots that slowers lenses may not. Buy one, they are great additions to any kit bag for little £.

Diego.

[alexisonfire]

I haven't got any direct comparisons, but here are all the photos on my flickr taken with the 50mm f/.8... http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=f%2F1.8&w=8872256%40N08

Its an absolutely brilliant lens, im in love with it :)

[mobilevirgin]

I can't do comparisons either - but I always show people this pic when they ask about a 50mm f/1.8

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/172/364675525_a97c2634d8.jpg

This was taken with the Canon version, but its an absolutely cracking lens and sooooooo cheap for so much quality. Just buy one.

[CT]

Yep - just get one - cracking lens and cheap as chips. :thumbs:

[db247]

Awesome lens, great for portraits, natural light, and gigs :) Plan to never sell mine.

http://www.damianbrownphotography.co.uk/thevikingsdrummer.jpg

http://www.damianbrownphotography.co.uk/atepicbirmingham.jpg

http://www.damianbrownphotography.co.uk/albumsalsamay/medium/0025.jpg

[alexisonfire]

Here is a quick test i did, no idea why the exposure is different, iso, aperture and shutter speed was the same for each test, as was the lighting, and the camera didn't move. :p

Anyway, regardless of the exposure, you can see that the 50mm is noticeable sharper :)

100% crops

http://www.msxphotography.com/randomuploads/50vs1855.jpg

[dakid]

Crazy differences ... anyone know what causes it?

[mole2k]

This wont really convince you but i've had two break on me in the past 3 months. The first one my gf dropped while attached to her camera and it fell apart the second fell out of my bag when the zips loosened itself. The camera + 10-20 fell out and the 50, the 10-20 and camera where fine after bouncing down the road the 50 has an internal element knocked out of alignment so it gives you some nice soft focus blur down the right hand side of the frame and to a lesser extent the left hand side.

[Chillimonster]

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1070/1350917859_80365417be_o.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1122/1351806578_9e6e4ac6ca_o.jpg

These are my favourite shots with the 50mm (well the same shot, just converted to B&W)

Available light, handheld, wide open at F1.8

For the money, can you afford NOT to have one. £57 off Ian (kerso), and it will be the best money you have spent.

Yes the 1.4 or 1.2 will be even better in low light, but are way more expensive.

[SimonTALM]

The 50mm f1.8 is one of the sharpest and optically clean lenses Nikon do, and with the f1.8 aperture it is ideal for both low light shooting and Depth of Field control. Also with the 1.5x crop factor the 50mm becomes the 35mm equivalent of 75mm which is in the ideal focal length range for portraits. You won't get a better lens for under £100

So unless you have the Nikon D40 or D40x (which doesn't have an autofocus motor) the you really should get one. Even if you have the D40 or D40x then you can still get it but it won't AF (I'm not 100% sure if it will meter either).

[desantnik]

Well, unless you've already got a very wide aperture lens, this is the cheapest way of getting REALLY wide aperture DOF effects. I know we always talk "cheap" on here, but this really is mucho epic cheapness for a lot of fun to play with.

As for quality of build, well you aint gonna get that, cheap and f1.8, so forget that, but its still well worth it.

[dazzajl]

Also with the 1.5x crop factor the 50mm becomes the 35mm equivalent of 75mm which is in the ideal focal length range for portraits.

That's partly true in as much as you'll end shooting at the same sort of subject distance you would with a 75mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera.

The other reason that short telephotos are favoured for portrait work is the mild compression that you get from lenses creeping over the 50mm mark.

I agree with everyone saying it would be daft not to have one though. For the pennies it will cost, the oportunities that open up are very well worth it.

Trying to decide whether I should get a 1.8 myself or bite the bullet and go for a 1.4. :shrug:

[Bob]

If there not convincing you they are me :thumbs:
Bob

[R8JimBob88]

Ive got one on my shopping list!

[Foggy]

Oh how I wish my D40 had a AF motor in it :(

[tommo]

Wow, thanks for all your replies! I think I'm now totally convinced, I'm getting one :D

Where's the cheapest Place? Is 'Kerso' on ebay??

[teddyt72]

Yep I am also convinced - I knew reading this thread would be a bad idea :bonk:

Just as soon as I've paid off my new 17-70, found the money to buy a new laptop that can actually cope with Raw files :help: then I might be able to get a nifty fifty!! When did "buying a cheap second hand DSLR off eBay to play with" become a 1000 quid expense?!! :bang:

We love it really :lol:

[Chillimonster]

Wow, thanks for all your replies! I think I'm now totally convinced, I'm getting one :D

Where's the cheapest Place? Is 'Kerso' on ebay??

Kerso (ian) is a member of these forums.

Drop him a PM and he'll get back to you with a price. :thumbs:

[flick5848]

This thread has just added one to my shopping list

I hate this forum :lol::lol:

[cowasaki]

I bought one when I bought my new D200. I also bought two other lenses which cost 5X more each! Guess which one is used the most !!! It is so good I am thinking of adding the faster one to my wish list too. They are both V cheap. Best price I found was DigitalRev via ebay for every item.

[treefingers]

Does anyone know if a AF model is on the horizon for us D40 users, or is it not possilbe due to the size? (be gentle I am a newbie)

[SimonTALM]

Does anyone know if a AF model is on the horizon for us D40 users, or is it not possilbe due to the size? (be gentle I am a newbie)

To be honest, I doubt it (at least for a long while, if ever) :shake:. The nifty fifty is actually quite quick at focusing and due to its small size is reasonably quiet so it wouldn't benefit hugely from the introduction of AF-S.

Plus at the moment the only cameras in the Nikon line up that can't use the nifty fifty are (IIRC) the D40 and D40x. These cameras are designed to bring people to the Nikon system for the lowest possible cost and I would imagine the Nikon view is that the majority of D40 and D40x users will never consider using any other lens than the Kit lens(es) they got with the camera. Those that do are probably quite rare and are very unlikely to want prime lenses, which to be honest are now generally the realm of enthusisats. IMHO most pros using mid range lenses on DSLRs want the convenience of a good zoom lens (f2.8 and sharp). I can't imagine many working pros using mid range lenses on DSLRs going back to the old days of selecting the correct prime lens for the shot.

However, If Nikon do think about AFS for they mid range primes I think it will be the ones most likely to be picked by portrait / wedding pros i.e. 50mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.4, again not the nifty fifty.