1.4 or 1.8, that is the question

[joeinmiami]

Hi there!

I like to get me a good indoor lens for my Nikon D80. I have been looking at the Nikon 50mm 1.4 and the 50 mm 1.8.

Since the difference between these lenses is just .4mm Does it justify expending extra $$$ to buy the 1.4? Basically I will be using this lens for taking photos of my new grandson, I would prefer not to use the flash, also I may be shooting some events at night were I may not be able to use flash.

Like always, any comments will be appreciated.

Joe :wave

[ziggy53]

Hi there!

I like to get me a good indoor lens for my Nikon D80. I have been looking at the Nikon 50mm 1.4 and the 50 mm 1.8.

Since the difference between these lenses is just .4mm Does it justify expending extra $$$ to buy the 1.4? Basically I will be using this lens for taking photos of my new grandson, I would prefer not to use the flash, also I may be shooting some events at night were I may not be able to use flash.

Like always, any comments will be appreciated.

Joe :wave

There are actually several lenses you might consider (Nikkor lens names abbreviated):

These are arranged roughly in order of image quality at widest aperture (by a number of different measures and center sharpness is only one measure).

Sigma 50mm, f1.4 EX DG HSM
Nikkor 50mm, f1.4G
Nikkor 50mm, f1.8D
Nikkor 50mm, f1.4D


The difference between an f1.4 lens and an f1.8 lens is 2/3rd of an f-stop. (The difference beween f1.4 and f2 would be a full stop.) The f1.4 will gather more light than will the f1.8, by around 2/3rds more.

The functional difference between all of these lenses is less than you might think. I would suggest the Nikkor 50mm, f1.8D just because it is a great lens at a value price and every Nikon shooter should probably have one. The f1.4 lenses are nice to have if you need them but if you don't know if you need it you may not need it.

I would not be concerned about using a flash, even with an infant. As long as you use indirect flash of some sort and maybe ISO 400 or 800, I don't think there is any substantial "startle".

Also see this:

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=147527&postcount=10

[rustic]

I'd agree with Ziggy, go with the 1.8 and see how it works for you. If you feel like that extra bit of light would make a big difference, then go for one of the others. Worst case you could sell the 1.8 and probably lose no more than a few bucks in the whole process.

The 1.8 was my first post-kit lens, and I've been happy with it.

[hiroProtagonist]

Hi there!

I like to get me a good indoor lens for my Nikon D80. I have been looking at the Nikon 50mm 1.4 and the 50 mm 1.8.

Since the difference between these lenses is just .4mm Does it justify expending extra $$$ to buy the 1.4? Basically I will be using this lens for taking photos of my new grandson, I would prefer not to use the flash, also I may be shooting some events at night were I may not be able to use flash.

Like always, any comments will be appreciated.

Joe :wave

Joe
My answer may seem a bit brunt but this is definetily one of those times where "if you have to ask, then you don't need it". On a more possitive side the 1.8 is an awsome lens, on a dollar to performance ratio the best Nikon makes. Get the 1.8 and enjoy photographing your grandson.

[Wil Davis]

snip…

Since the difference between these lenses is just .4mm
…snip
Your apparent understanding of the difference between the two lenses tells me that in your case it most probably doesn't really matter too much; go with the least expensive solution. The f1.7 50mm lens is very good value…

- Wil

[redleash]

I just got the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 based on Ziggy's suggestion that "every Nikon owner should have one." :D

I have not shot a lot with it yet but I am happy with what I've done so far. It's highly affordable and offers clear, crisp images with very nice background dropoff at the low f/stop end. IMO, it would be a very good buy for your needs.

Lauren

[Manfr3d]

The answer is hidden as a secret message, encoded in the balance of your bank account. :wink

[Tiziano]

I have the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM and a Sigma 28mm f/1.8.
Most of the shooting I do with these lenses is indoors with ambient light. Sometimes it's of my grandson or nephew. In these cases I've noticed that at ISO400 and a shutter speed of 60 I get enough light at f/2 (and even a little narrower). Wider than that and the DOF is so short that I have trouble getting a usable picture of the kids.

My point is that, as everyone else has said, a 1.8 would work just fine.

[ban25]

I would consider the Nikon 35/1.8. The wider focal length may be a bit more suitable indoors and at $200, it's quite reasonably priced.

[cpallen]

I have a d80 and both the DX AFS-G 35mm f/1.8 and the AF-D 50mm f/1.8 and find them both to be useful shooting the kids. The 50mm lets you get in pretty tight for their facial expressions - particularly when they are coloring or watching tv, opening gifts, etc - without actually getting IN their face.

But sometimes with the 50 you can't back up enough - with the 35mm you can always crop. Physics-wise I think in reality that the 50mm is a little faster than the 35mm.

I tried out the 50mm f/1.4g and found that the depth of field is so shallow at 1.4 that (for my skill lkevel anyway) it's not a very useful capabilty for the extra $300 or so it would cost. Conversely, the 50mm D lens works great at 1.8, and if you need a little more a 3x5 card taped in front of on-camera flash as a diffuser helps alot without being harsh.

Just my 2 cents as a beginnier.

Courtney in Seattle