Nikon 50mm 1.4 v 1.8

S

samsnikon

Messages
174
Edit My Images
Yes
I have both the above lens and am really confused about which one to keep.

I have used the 1.8 for a while and loved it and then got the 1.4 expecting more of the same.

However, the concensus on the web is that for 3x the price the 1.4 isn't worth it. I confess that I maybe not be good enough to exploit what the 1.4 could offer.

Also the depth of field is very fine on the 1.4, which I did not realise, which means I could have the nose in focus but not the ears.

My key reason for going to a prime was to talk pictures of my kids, both toddlers. This involves a lot of indoor shots.

Also I hope to use the lens to do some city photographs and macro work (if I ever get the time).

I would appreciate any advice from anyone who has gone from one to the other.

I know the sigma 50mm/1.4 maybe better but at the moment I am just focussed on the above two.

I have a separate thread on lens hood
 
No point keeping the 1.4 unless you shoot wide open. 1.8 is a cracker, doesn't need a hood because the front optic is recessed.

But you know that.
 
On the 1.8 I did most of my shooting at 1.8.

On the 1.4 I am wondering as to whether I can really shoot at 1.4 and get away with it wiht such a fine DOF
 
I rarely shoot at 1.8 or 1.4, but feel my 1.4 50mm is a better lens than the 1.8 version. However, as you say, probably not 3 times better.
 
Now I am really confused, as I have been looking at the thread in general on child photography and the photographers there are shooting with primes at 1.4.

Damn, wish life was more simple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top