Buy Low Price From Here Now
Nikon 50MM F/1.4G AF-S Nikkor Lens
Readmore
Technical Details
- Normal angle of view on FX-format cameras - Classic, normal angle of view when used on a Nikon FX-format digital SLR or 35mm film camera
- An ideal portrait lens when used on a Nikon DX-format digital SLR, approximating the angle of view similar to that of a 75mm lens
- Nikon Super Integrated Coating (SIC) enhances light transmission efficiency and offers superior color consistency and reduced flare
- Exclusive Nikon Silent Wave Motor (SWM) enables fast, accurate, and quiet autofocus
- Close focusing to 1.5 feet
See more technical details
2010-04-13
By Surfer Dude (Maryland, USA)
I have a side business as a freelance photographer, doing production photography, headshots weddings, & art. And I gotta say, this is a fantabulous lens, plain & simple. I honestly don't see why some people are dumping on this lens! I admit, I haven't used the Sigma 50mm f1.4 (which must be huge & heavy, which I don't want), or anything comparable from other manufacturers, but I couldn't be happier. I did have the older 50mm AF-Nikkor f1.4 D, which was great, but I sold it-for good money-and got this version, despite the opinions that one shouldn't. I've been using this new version for about a month now-including 2 paid freelance shoots-and don't regret it.
Pros: 1) Image quality. Contrast, color reproduction & sharpness are superior. I was shocked at the amount of detail I've been capturing. 2) Awesome in low light-how can it not be at f1.4?. 3) Smooth, quiet autofocus. Autofocus is noticeably slower than the AF-D model, but for most situations where you'd be using a prime lens I think it's fine. Plus it's nice when you're photographing a singer up close, trying to be intimate & keep her comfortable, to not have the "buzz" of the old screwdriver-focused lens. 4) Autofocus with manual override. If AF isn't working (like in low light) just hold the shutter button down half-way & turn the focusing ring. This is the way Nikon lenses are being designed nowadays, & that's a good thing! 5) Bokeh. Despite the negative reviews, I like the bokeh I get at wider apertures. Which was one of the reasons I wanted it-the 9 blade rounded diaphragm should be better for background blur than the straight, 7-blade diaphragm of the older model. I'm thinking it helps that I shoot on a camera with a DX sensor, so if you have a D700, D3, D3x, or 35mm film you might get different results. Otherwise, you should not be disappointed. 6) Ergonomics. It just has a really good feel to me. 7) Almost true internal focusing. The lens barrel doesn't change length while focusing, so you can hold onto any part of the lens & focus. 8) Hood. Comes with a nice bayonet hood, easy to put on and off, unlike the AF-D model, for which you need to separately purchase a screw-on rubber hood. 9) Forward compatibility. The only Nikon 50mm lens that will autofocus on the Nikon D40, D40x, D60, D3000, & D5000, which require lenses with their own focusing motors.
Cons: Very few of significance. 1) Manual focusing. It works well, & the ability to override autofocus without flicking a switch is great, but I find the focusing ring a little harder to handle than on the older model. This model is larger overall, leading to a larger focusing ring (& filter), and my hands are a little small-ish, so that could be why. But this isn't a major factor if you use autofocus most/all of the time. The ring on this lens also feels tighter to me-which could be both a good & bad feature. 2) Larger filter size-58mm vs. the old, common 52. Only an issue if you already have 52mm filters and would have to get new ones for this lens. If you have multiple lenses with different filter sizes, try to just get one size of most filters and use a step-up ring. 3) Slower autofocus-but see above, not a major problem in my view. 4) Price. Pretty expensive at approximately $450.00, but it's actually not as bad as it looks. If you use a hood, like I do, then you don't have to buy one separately. It also comes with a nice carrying case-not essential, but a good touch. 5) Backward compatibility. Will not work on the older film cameras, because it lacks an aperture ring. Probably won't matter to most people.
The older 50mm Nikon f1.4 AF-D is terrific. This version is even terrific-er. All I can say is, if you need a terrific-er 50mm lens: Go for it!
2010-03-29
By T. Haines (NY)
I was hesitant for a while to get this lens. I already owned the prior Nikkor 50mm 1.4 and I felt this new 50mm was just an incremental upgrade, specifically with regard to focusing speed. About a year or so after it was released I finally decided to get it. I can say that this lens is NOT JUST an incremental upgrade, it's a significantly improved lens. Color quality, contrast, and sharpness are all greatly improved over the original 50mm 1.4. The original 50mm was a great lens, so to improve upon that lens is a pretty big achievement. Image quality is just beautiful.
Comparing it to the Canon 50mm 1.4, my opinion is that the Nikkor is so much better that its in another class entirely. The only things I don't like about it are I think the original 50mm was build better. This one is not plastic but it feels plastic-y somehow. THe last 50mm lens was built like a slug of metal with glass inside of it. Not this one.
Also, while the focusing IS faster than the last 50mm I don't feel it's on par with Nikon's other pro-lenses (24-70 2.8, etc). To me its slower, but it's still a lot faster than the last 50mm.
2010-03-24
By Jeremy (Tulsa, OK)
I already own the f/1.8d, decided to rent this lens for a week to test-drive before buying. Took it to Austin during SXSW to shoot low light street and concert photography, a scenario I am comfortable shooting in.
pros: nice and sharp
cons:
build quality is average - however, there is a thin, brittle-feeling rim around the edges of the lens element. not sure what it's there for, but I felt the need to have a UV filter, which I would never use for the 50/1.8
BIG CON - while it's very quiet, autofocus is really very slow for a purported pro level lens.
I was reaffirmed of it's slowness when I popped on my friend's old 35mm f/2. AF was lighting quick.
bottom line: the slow autofocus is a deal breaker. I will probably go for the old 50mm f/1.4 instead, (or that 35 f/2 if only it were a bit faster.)
2010-03-22
By Rafael Osorno (Torrance, CA)
Definitely, is a must have for portrait shooters. The luminosity of this baby at 1.4 is wonderful. Every picture has a beautiful bokeh and you can use a CPL on outsides to pop-up the colors (but watch the skin tones!!). It's a very important lens if you are seriously considering taking portraits on studio or weddings and so on.
2010-03-18
By tachi1 (Miami, FL United States)
I have never before owned or used a lens as fast as f-1.4. I was prepared for the advantages, but not for the disadvantages.
The first surprise was that just having a f-1.4 aperture doesn't make it great. The photos come out with a very, very shallow depth of field and, even where there is focus, it isn't sharp focus. This makes it flattering for head-on portraits of older people but almost too soft for portraits of babies and toddlers who have smooth skin anyway. I say "head on" because if the face is at an angle the front eye will be in focus, the back eye not. I knew this, intellectually, but was unprepared for just how annoying it can be.
The photos that come out sharp and beautiful are the ones you take in the neighborhood of f-5.6 and the more you stop down, the better. As you might imagine, this is a disappointment because I have other lenses I could have used at f-5.6 to take those photographs.
I had assumed that getting used to having to move back and forth was going to be a greater problem than it turned out to be. It's trying to figure out the aperture that is turning out to be the serious learning curve.
Having a prime lens forces you to learn photography instead of being dependent on program modes that make the important decisions for you. Since it doesn't zoom, there are limits built in as far as framing goes. Aperture decisions have really noticeable consequences. So it keeps you on your toes.
These are my observations after almost two months of use:
PRO'S:
* Random photos taken outdoors and which use f-5-6 to around f-11, are better (but not by that much) than those taken with other lenses. Ditto for macro shots. The bokeh, if it happens, does elevate the photo to another level. I think that the non-bokeh blurring is also a little bit smoother.
* I am using this lens on a DX format camera (D-80), so 50mm is actually 75 mm, and this might make a difference versus using it on a full-frame sensor (FX) camera, especially in terms of flexibility and framing. Of course, when using it as a portrait lens, it is probably an advantage.
* It focuses fast. The actual focus point will be sharp. Anywhere else depends on the aperture.
* The colors are a little bit cool, but the blacks are very rich, so the overall color is very pleasing.
* I don't notice anything unusual in terms of edge distortion, barrel or pincushion distortion, vignetting, or color fringing. There is some where you would expect to find it, but it is no worse (and possibly better) than other lenses.
CON'S
* I had assumed that I wouldn't need flash in a reasonably well-lit indoor situation. But, at f-3.3 on Aperture Priority Mode and in a well-lit church, I did need it.
* Photos taken with f-stops wider than f-4.8 are hit and miss, with more miss than hit. Most can be fixed in post-processing, but I'm trying to get it right in the camera and I'm not getting that.
* The wide f-stops are alright for getting shots you can't possibly get any other way, but it's a situation where something is better than nothing---acceptable but not great shots.
* There is curious kind of "noise" in the background midtones that isn't bokeh nor does it look like the typical (dot-dot-dot) luminous or color noise, more like a mild stain that is a more noticeable onscreen than in print.
* I find that "noise" thing I mentioned above a little confusing. Normally, in post processing, when you open up the exposure you reveal noise in the shadow areas. But this is in the whole range of midtones and it's there even without increasing the exposure post capture.
* Upon checking my metadata, that midtone noise is very visible at ISO 200, f-3.3 @1/60. With a wider aperture, it is intolerable, with a smaller aperture it begins to improve. By f-5.6, it is almost gone.
* Anti-noise plug ins take care of it by blurring, but that is not the idea.
* I usually shoot at 100 ISO, but with this lens, I'm going to have to rethink that.
* The sweet spot, aperture-wise, seems to be between f-5.6 and f-8. Focus and sharpness are best; midtone noise is not an issue, shadow noise is normal. But, again, every other lens I own handles this range almost as well.
* Some of these problems can be blamed on my lack of experience with wide apertures, but not all.
CONCLUSION:
* On the whole, I regret paying this much for a lens that is so difficult to get along with and gives such mixed results. I will get very little use of any aperture wider than f-5.6, and those were the very apertures I paid such a premium price for.
* Ask yourself, realistically, how often you will really need to shoot in low light. I overestimated.
* If you really want a fast prime lens, I would recommend looking into the lower priced Nikon 50 mm primes also available at Amazon. I purchased this lens, the NIKON 50mm f/1.4G SIC SW Prime Nikkor Lens ($460.00). Alternate 1: The Nikon 50 mm f/1.4 AF Nikkor lens costs $329.00, and alternate 2, the Nikon 50 mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens, costs $126.00.
* It may be generally true that you have to get "good glass," I decided that (for once) I would get what seemed like the best "glass" from the 50-mm prime choices. I don't think it was wise in this case.
* Qualification: Unless you have a D-40 or a D-60 which depend on the focusing motor in a the lens. The two lower-priced alternatives would have to be manually focused on those cameras.
Images Product
Buy Nikon 50mm f/1.4G SIC SW Prime Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras Now
