Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4 G Lens: Highly recommended by dpreview.com
›Read the full Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4 G lens review at dpreview.com
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Product Description
From the Manufacturer
Ideal for travel, event, environmental and general photography in a wide variety of conditions, with superb optical formula and an ultra-fast f/1.4 maximum aperture.
Fast f/1.4 prime NIKKOR lens
Perfect for low-light conditions, general and travel photography.
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.
Ideal portrait lens on DX-format cameras
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 on a Nikon FX-format digital SLR or a 35mm film camera.
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
For extended versatility.
Rounded 9-blade diaphragm
Renders more natural appearance of out-of-focus image elements.
Product Description
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G SIC SW Prime Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
Available Warranties for This Item
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
246 of 252 people found the following review helpful
By J. Thompson
This lens is very well-made and takes wonderful pictures. To address the most common questions people ask before they take the plunge:
Price: No, it's not usually this expensive. I paid around $400 for mine, but I got it a couple of months ago. Apparently Nikon is having a hard time making enough of these. Rather than rewarding the greedy opportunists who are now charging exorbitant prices for this lens, I suggest calling local and smaller camera shops - they are much more likely to have one sitting on the shelves. It's absolutely worth about $500, but I wouldn't pay more than that. The Sigma (very similar, see below) is a better value at that point.
Image quality: Great. Slightly soft and glowy at 1.4, but that's to be expected. Gets quite sharp at 2.8. The Sigma is even softer at 1.4 than this lens, so if wide-open sharpness is important to you, this is your lens.
Bokeh: Nice, but a little jittery at 1.4 on specular highlights. This means that if you have any light sources or sharp point reflections in the out-of-focus area behind your subject, you will see little light rings around the round blob. These disappear at f2, and they don't really bother me. They are a side effect of correcting spherical aberration in the image - lens manufacturers have to make tough choices sometimes, and Nikon apparently chose wide-open image correction over the absolute best bokeh possible in this circumstance. Compared to other lenses: not quite as nice as the Sigma 50/1.4 wide open, but you get a sharper in-focus area, so it's a trade-off. Not really able to compete with the 85/1.4 or the 105/2 DC, but that's not surprising - those lenses have a much longer focal length.
Focusing: Fast and precise. To be sure, at 1.4, the depth of field (especially at closer focusing distances) is RAZOR thin, so focusing just isn't possibly going to be spot-on every time. I frequently use manual focus, and even a TINY, TINY nudge on the focus ring moves the plane of sharp focus about one-half inch at those distances, so it's extremely hard to get perfect focus exactly where you want it to be. Be prepared to have some patience, or use live view, if you plan to take close-up shots at 1.4 and you want perfect focus. Most amateurs won't notice if things are slightly out of focus, so not generally a problem unless you're a perfectionist. If you're a constant autofocus user you will not even be aware of this issue. Speaking of up-close focus, I will mention that I feel this lens has a fairly short focusing distance, which is nice - you can really get in nice and tight on subjects and come up with some really attention-getting compositions with neat depth-of-field effects. It's no macro, but I'm constantly amazed at just how close I can get to things.
Low-light performance: Stellar. That's really why I bought this lens, as I already have several amazing lenses for portraiture/bokeh. I love this lens for events where I have room to move around (it's a little long in focal length for tightly-packed spaces) because I hate using flash if it's not necessary. This lens and a slight ISO boost is all you need to take flash-free pictures in many settings.
Build quality: Good. Not like Nikon's professional-grade lenses, but very sturdy - I can't foresee any possible problems. The plastic hood is a twist-on bayonet type, and it works well but can be slightly annoying at times.
Lack of VR: Not a big deal - you shouldn't need VR for a 50mm lens at this aperture; it is easily possible to get to a reasonable shutter speed so that shake isn't a problem. On an APS-C sensor, I'd aim for at least 1/60 second if you want blur-free images. At 1/125 second, you'd have to be going through an earthquake to see any shake with this lens, because it just doesn't have enough focal length to make that a problem. Besides, would you really want to pay $200 more for a 50mm prime? Nikon would have to make this a 1.2 for that to make sense to most people. I think the decision to leave VR off this lens was a good one.
Price: No, it's not usually this expensive. I paid around $400 for mine, but I got it a couple of months ago. Apparently Nikon is having a hard time making enough of these. Rather than rewarding the greedy opportunists who are now charging exorbitant prices for this lens, I suggest calling local and smaller camera shops - they are much more likely to have one sitting on the shelves. It's absolutely worth about $500, but I wouldn't pay more than that. The Sigma (very similar, see below) is a better value at that point.
Image quality: Great. Slightly soft and glowy at 1.4, but that's to be expected. Gets quite sharp at 2.8. The Sigma is even softer at 1.4 than this lens, so if wide-open sharpness is important to you, this is your lens.
Bokeh: Nice, but a little jittery at 1.4 on specular highlights. This means that if you have any light sources or sharp point reflections in the out-of-focus area behind your subject, you will see little light rings around the round blob. These disappear at f2, and they don't really bother me. They are a side effect of correcting spherical aberration in the image - lens manufacturers have to make tough choices sometimes, and Nikon apparently chose wide-open image correction over the absolute best bokeh possible in this circumstance. Compared to other lenses: not quite as nice as the Sigma 50/1.4 wide open, but you get a sharper in-focus area, so it's a trade-off. Not really able to compete with the 85/1.4 or the 105/2 DC, but that's not surprising - those lenses have a much longer focal length.
Focusing: Fast and precise. To be sure, at 1.4, the depth of field (especially at closer focusing distances) is RAZOR thin, so focusing just isn't possibly going to be spot-on every time. I frequently use manual focus, and even a TINY, TINY nudge on the focus ring moves the plane of sharp focus about one-half inch at those distances, so it's extremely hard to get perfect focus exactly where you want it to be. Be prepared to have some patience, or use live view, if you plan to take close-up shots at 1.4 and you want perfect focus. Most amateurs won't notice if things are slightly out of focus, so not generally a problem unless you're a perfectionist. If you're a constant autofocus user you will not even be aware of this issue. Speaking of up-close focus, I will mention that I feel this lens has a fairly short focusing distance, which is nice - you can really get in nice and tight on subjects and come up with some really attention-getting compositions with neat depth-of-field effects. It's no macro, but I'm constantly amazed at just how close I can get to things.
Low-light performance: Stellar. That's really why I bought this lens, as I already have several amazing lenses for portraiture/bokeh. I love this lens for events where I have room to move around (it's a little long in focal length for tightly-packed spaces) because I hate using flash if it's not necessary. This lens and a slight ISO boost is all you need to take flash-free pictures in many settings.
Build quality: Good. Not like Nikon's professional-grade lenses, but very sturdy - I can't foresee any possible problems. The plastic hood is a twist-on bayonet type, and it works well but can be slightly annoying at times.
Lack of VR: Not a big deal - you shouldn't need VR for a 50mm lens at this aperture; it is easily possible to get to a reasonable shutter speed so that shake isn't a problem. On an APS-C sensor, I'd aim for at least 1/60 second if you want blur-free images. At 1/125 second, you'd have to be going through an earthquake to see any shake with this lens, because it just doesn't have enough focal length to make that a problem. Besides, would you really want to pay $200 more for a 50mm prime? Nikon would have to make this a 1.2 for that to make sense to most people. I think the decision to leave VR off this lens was a good one.
238 of 265 people found the following review helpful
By Tom Iancu
Intro
I was eagerly expecting this upgrade from Nikon since I have not been very pleased by the old AF-D version. The Nikon 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens was a performant lens with careful handling and focusing of static or relatively static subjects. However, for action shooting AF with the D version was lacking the kind of snap needed for those "razor sharp" details. Moreover, very prone to flare and coma and with somewhat low contrast rendition of images, the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D was never my lens of choice even for portraiture. During 2007 I got a Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 APO Lanthar (in Nikon mount), manual focus, that gave me the pleasure of portraiture as I wanted to be (really, for the money that lens is awesome).
However, having a better focusing less flare-prone, high contrast 50mm prime was tempting and, as rumours about an AF-S version started to appear, I decided to sell my old f/1.4 and get the new AF-S version.
However, even this upgrade did not entirely match my expectations. I try to detail below some of my findings.
Subject isolation, sharpness, DOF and bokeh
One of the reasons of getting a large aperture lens is isolation of subjects. Subject sharpness, smooth transitions on D0F interval and pleasant bokeh (see below) is the triad that, usually, influence purchase of such lenses. I have another one: ease of use and reduced weight. The third: getting a prime that has usable AF on D40/D40x/D60 (yes this can be used). Moreover, I am more and more tempted to use fixed focals for general photography and walkaround, thus I lack a performant 35mm prime that will act as a normal focal for my D300 to use most of the time (like back in the old days of film when I was less lazy and spoiled by zooms).
The new 50mm f/1.4 does an excellent job at isolating the subject and sometimes you have to take a lot of care about focusing exactly on those portions of the image that you want to be sharp since even slight deviations might defocus quite severely. The custom stop difference for DOF blurring between a DX and FX is about one stop, which means that a f/1.4 on DX achieves the kind of DOF that you will get with a f/2.0 lens on a FX. However, those of you who wish to get that "magic, almost 3D look of images" should keep in mind that this subjective perception of the image is a combination of subject isolation and peripheral perception of the eye of the blurred background - thus, the higher the quality of the bokeh, the better the "3D" look of the image.
Unfortunately, the extreme sharpness of this lens - even wide open, at f/1.4 - comes at a price, a bokeh which, in my opinion, is not so pleasant. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM produces a better looking (smoother, with no harsh artifacts due to diffraction on aperture rim) bokeh, but with lower sharpness overall. In the end, all comes to your personal preference: sharpness or excellent bokeh ? You cannot have both as a consequence of optical constraints. Nikon tried to launch a rasor-sharp wide opened prime (which it is), with good DOF capabilities, within an optical formula and glass specs that do not generate a tremendous amount of smooth blurring of the background (bokeh). Please remember that depth of field only gives an estimate of blurring of a subject which is in the focus interval, i.e. how blurred the image will be just outside the DOF interval. DOF does not correlate with the DEGREE of blurring of objects placed at SIGNIFICANT distance behind the subject in focus. If the background is far enough (which translates: outside the depth of field) and the subject if close (inside the hyperfocal distance) the DEGREE of blurring is related to the absolute physical size of the lens aperture. That's why the bokeh is better with large diameter glass and Sigma 50mm f/1.4 has "better" bokeh (smoother)than the 50mm AF-S. A basic rule of thumb (that you might consider in your "bokeh-oriented" purchases) when comparing lenses of same focal distance is that the quality of bokeh is directly proportional with the result of: (glass frontal element diameter)/(aperture value F). For example, for a 50mm f/1.4 with a 25mm frontal element that proportion will yield apx. 18; for a 50mm f/1.4 lens with a 50mm frontal element, the result would be apx. 35. You would expect a doubling of of the blur with such large glass.
However, large frontal element and better blur comes at the price of heavy optics and more aberration-prone lens which translate in lower sharpness and reduced microcontrast. The 50mm f/1.4 AF-S Nikkor excels at sharpness and microcontrast (which is not the case of Sigma), thus you will have to choose based on your personal shooting preferences, which lens to pick in the end. Maybe a Zeiss ?
Color accuracy
The lens is on the cool side and this means that colors will be perceived by your eyes as more natural. Remember that what our brain interpretes as pure white (and make you think "this is white") is something that has quite a lot of blue in it. This is why, in bygone days, they were adding blueish bleaching stuff when doing laundry: the sensation of perfect white.
However, this slight tendency to the cold side has a consequence when shooting with flash: try to compensate a bit the color temp and make it a bit warmer, otherwise soome magenta casts will appear especially in shadows.
Under natural light the color and contrast are almost perfect with well defined hues and very good to excellent separation of colors (something which the old 50mm AF-D did not display) and a wonderful, absolutely wonderful microcontrast.
Used under overcast, the lens will retrieve images that have a slightly dramatic, "journalism-like" look, with deep blues and blacks (excellent as density for printing) and well defined details.
The color rendition does not change with aperture values, just your perception of better contrast will increase as the aperture narrows (due to increased sharpness per field).
Due to the relative small glass element diameters, the lens behaves like a planar, thus very low distorsion (close to absent) at the minimum shooting distance can be observed making it ideal for closeups. This is more obvious on DX format.
No vignetting observed by me, both on DX and FX.
Build
The lens uses plastic, but a very good quality one. Is bigger and heavier than the old AF-D (weight: 8.1 oz (230g) AF-D vs. 10.2 oz (290g) AF-S; length: 2.0 inch (50mm) AF-D vs. 2.1 inch (54.2mm) AF-S; diameter: 2.6 inch (66mm) AF-D vs. 2.9 inch (73.5mm) AF-S), but not as heavy as the Sigma (18.3oz (520g); 3.33in x 2.69in (84.5 mm × 68.2 mm) );
The focusing ring is acceptable damped but not for precision MF, in my opinion.
Overall rating and conclusions
Yes, I recommend buying this lens due to its exceptional sharpness wide open, color rendition contrast and compactness. Moreover, owners of D40/D40x/D60 finally have a cool prime they can use on their AF crippled cameras (no internal motor) which - I believe - is the primary reason this lens was launched on the market.
However, bokeh lovers should look elsewhere, in my opinion, or carefully select scenes and compositions if they are looking for the ultimate blurring of the background. If I'd had enough to invest I would take both: the Sigma for the bokeh and more poetry in my images, the AF-S for studio shooting, sharpness and subject isolation.
The choice is yours.
Highly recommended.
Dec 22, 2008 (I made myself a birthday present)
----------
Update: February 2nd, 2010
Some updates on image quality. Actually not true one of the comments to my review in what concerns the bokeh on a full-frame. I have a D700 now and the bokeh of this lens at F/1.4 is far less pleasing even than the DX 35mm f/1.8 in DX mode on D700. By the way, the 35 DX is one of the best lenses (image-wise in what concerns sharpness AND color rendition) I ever bought. Not to mention the stellar APO LANTHAR 90mm at 3.5 (a 90mm lens, though) - unfortunately an extinct bird, such a pity !
The issue is that physics cannot be cheated: large glass diameter = better bokeh. That's it. But this AF-S G 50mm has some other advantages, especially on a FF. For example, better focusing under incandescent light. Not dim, incandescent (focus accuracy is heavily dependent on wavelength). Or as a perfect companion for going out "light" - reminds you of good old days of fixed focals. Or the very good correction of curvature (reacts almost as a PLANAR and recommend it for portraits), at the expense of CA, of course - but this is easily correctable in pp. For example, the sigma 50mm f/1,4 is very sharp but with a curvature that reminds of a 35 mm FF lens. Overall, the most pleasant bokeh (IMO) on any Nikon lens is on the 200mmf/2. But that's another league. I am a lucky person: I have access to a wide array of lenses and I can test them. I hope I will have enough time to spend to post these opinions on my website. Finally, would I buy this lens again knowing what I know now ? Of course. It is a very welcomed update in the aging nikon lens lineup.
I was eagerly expecting this upgrade from Nikon since I have not been very pleased by the old AF-D version. The Nikon 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens was a performant lens with careful handling and focusing of static or relatively static subjects. However, for action shooting AF with the D version was lacking the kind of snap needed for those "razor sharp" details. Moreover, very prone to flare and coma and with somewhat low contrast rendition of images, the 50mm f/1.4 AF-D was never my lens of choice even for portraiture. During 2007 I got a Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 APO Lanthar (in Nikon mount), manual focus, that gave me the pleasure of portraiture as I wanted to be (really, for the money that lens is awesome).
However, having a better focusing less flare-prone, high contrast 50mm prime was tempting and, as rumours about an AF-S version started to appear, I decided to sell my old f/1.4 and get the new AF-S version.
However, even this upgrade did not entirely match my expectations. I try to detail below some of my findings.
Subject isolation, sharpness, DOF and bokeh
One of the reasons of getting a large aperture lens is isolation of subjects. Subject sharpness, smooth transitions on D0F interval and pleasant bokeh (see below) is the triad that, usually, influence purchase of such lenses. I have another one: ease of use and reduced weight. The third: getting a prime that has usable AF on D40/D40x/D60 (yes this can be used). Moreover, I am more and more tempted to use fixed focals for general photography and walkaround, thus I lack a performant 35mm prime that will act as a normal focal for my D300 to use most of the time (like back in the old days of film when I was less lazy and spoiled by zooms).
The new 50mm f/1.4 does an excellent job at isolating the subject and sometimes you have to take a lot of care about focusing exactly on those portions of the image that you want to be sharp since even slight deviations might defocus quite severely. The custom stop difference for DOF blurring between a DX and FX is about one stop, which means that a f/1.4 on DX achieves the kind of DOF that you will get with a f/2.0 lens on a FX. However, those of you who wish to get that "magic, almost 3D look of images" should keep in mind that this subjective perception of the image is a combination of subject isolation and peripheral perception of the eye of the blurred background - thus, the higher the quality of the bokeh, the better the "3D" look of the image.
Unfortunately, the extreme sharpness of this lens - even wide open, at f/1.4 - comes at a price, a bokeh which, in my opinion, is not so pleasant. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM produces a better looking (smoother, with no harsh artifacts due to diffraction on aperture rim) bokeh, but with lower sharpness overall. In the end, all comes to your personal preference: sharpness or excellent bokeh ? You cannot have both as a consequence of optical constraints. Nikon tried to launch a rasor-sharp wide opened prime (which it is), with good DOF capabilities, within an optical formula and glass specs that do not generate a tremendous amount of smooth blurring of the background (bokeh). Please remember that depth of field only gives an estimate of blurring of a subject which is in the focus interval, i.e. how blurred the image will be just outside the DOF interval. DOF does not correlate with the DEGREE of blurring of objects placed at SIGNIFICANT distance behind the subject in focus. If the background is far enough (which translates: outside the depth of field) and the subject if close (inside the hyperfocal distance) the DEGREE of blurring is related to the absolute physical size of the lens aperture. That's why the bokeh is better with large diameter glass and Sigma 50mm f/1.4 has "better" bokeh (smoother)than the 50mm AF-S. A basic rule of thumb (that you might consider in your "bokeh-oriented" purchases) when comparing lenses of same focal distance is that the quality of bokeh is directly proportional with the result of: (glass frontal element diameter)/(aperture value F). For example, for a 50mm f/1.4 with a 25mm frontal element that proportion will yield apx. 18; for a 50mm f/1.4 lens with a 50mm frontal element, the result would be apx. 35. You would expect a doubling of of the blur with such large glass.
However, large frontal element and better blur comes at the price of heavy optics and more aberration-prone lens which translate in lower sharpness and reduced microcontrast. The 50mm f/1.4 AF-S Nikkor excels at sharpness and microcontrast (which is not the case of Sigma), thus you will have to choose based on your personal shooting preferences, which lens to pick in the end. Maybe a Zeiss ?
Color accuracy
The lens is on the cool side and this means that colors will be perceived by your eyes as more natural. Remember that what our brain interpretes as pure white (and make you think "this is white") is something that has quite a lot of blue in it. This is why, in bygone days, they were adding blueish bleaching stuff when doing laundry: the sensation of perfect white.
However, this slight tendency to the cold side has a consequence when shooting with flash: try to compensate a bit the color temp and make it a bit warmer, otherwise soome magenta casts will appear especially in shadows.
Under natural light the color and contrast are almost perfect with well defined hues and very good to excellent separation of colors (something which the old 50mm AF-D did not display) and a wonderful, absolutely wonderful microcontrast.
Used under overcast, the lens will retrieve images that have a slightly dramatic, "journalism-like" look, with deep blues and blacks (excellent as density for printing) and well defined details.
The color rendition does not change with aperture values, just your perception of better contrast will increase as the aperture narrows (due to increased sharpness per field).
Due to the relative small glass element diameters, the lens behaves like a planar, thus very low distorsion (close to absent) at the minimum shooting distance can be observed making it ideal for closeups. This is more obvious on DX format.
No vignetting observed by me, both on DX and FX.
Build
The lens uses plastic, but a very good quality one. Is bigger and heavier than the old AF-D (weight: 8.1 oz (230g) AF-D vs. 10.2 oz (290g) AF-S; length: 2.0 inch (50mm) AF-D vs. 2.1 inch (54.2mm) AF-S; diameter: 2.6 inch (66mm) AF-D vs. 2.9 inch (73.5mm) AF-S), but not as heavy as the Sigma (18.3oz (520g); 3.33in x 2.69in (84.5 mm × 68.2 mm) );
The focusing ring is acceptable damped but not for precision MF, in my opinion.
Overall rating and conclusions
Yes, I recommend buying this lens due to its exceptional sharpness wide open, color rendition contrast and compactness. Moreover, owners of D40/D40x/D60 finally have a cool prime they can use on their AF crippled cameras (no internal motor) which - I believe - is the primary reason this lens was launched on the market.
However, bokeh lovers should look elsewhere, in my opinion, or carefully select scenes and compositions if they are looking for the ultimate blurring of the background. If I'd had enough to invest I would take both: the Sigma for the bokeh and more poetry in my images, the AF-S for studio shooting, sharpness and subject isolation.
The choice is yours.
Highly recommended.
Dec 22, 2008 (I made myself a birthday present)
----------
Update: February 2nd, 2010
Some updates on image quality. Actually not true one of the comments to my review in what concerns the bokeh on a full-frame. I have a D700 now and the bokeh of this lens at F/1.4 is far less pleasing even than the DX 35mm f/1.8 in DX mode on D700. By the way, the 35 DX is one of the best lenses (image-wise in what concerns sharpness AND color rendition) I ever bought. Not to mention the stellar APO LANTHAR 90mm at 3.5 (a 90mm lens, though) - unfortunately an extinct bird, such a pity !
The issue is that physics cannot be cheated: large glass diameter = better bokeh. That's it. But this AF-S G 50mm has some other advantages, especially on a FF. For example, better focusing under incandescent light. Not dim, incandescent (focus accuracy is heavily dependent on wavelength). Or as a perfect companion for going out "light" - reminds you of good old days of fixed focals. Or the very good correction of curvature (reacts almost as a PLANAR and recommend it for portraits), at the expense of CA, of course - but this is easily correctable in pp. For example, the sigma 50mm f/1,4 is very sharp but with a curvature that reminds of a 35 mm FF lens. Overall, the most pleasant bokeh (IMO) on any Nikon lens is on the 200mmf/2. But that's another league. I am a lucky person: I have access to a wide array of lenses and I can test them. I hope I will have enough time to spend to post these opinions on my website. Finally, would I buy this lens again knowing what I know now ? Of course. It is a very welcomed update in the aging nikon lens lineup.
100 of 113 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
One of the best lens for portrait and low light photography. Autofocus will also work with D40, D40x and D60 cameras.
December 31, 2008
This Nikon 50mm f/1.4G AF-S lens produces sharp pictures and great color and contrast. It is also perfect for portrait and other general purposes (semi-macro etc). This lens also produces nice bokeh. The picture quality and bokeh quality are comparable with the other (older) Nikon 50mm lens which are famous for being sharp. Overall, this is a very versatile lens.
Many of us (including those who already own 50mm f/1.8D AF or 50mm f/1.4D AF as well) have been waiting for this lens for a long time, and overall it is worth the wait, and it is worth the upgrade to this 50mm f/1.4G AF-S. If you don't own any of the earlier version of the 50mm lens then you should definitely get this lens over the older 50mm non-AFS lens (especially if price is not much of a factor for you or if your camera body is a D40, D40x, or D60 which the autofocus with will work with those cameras as well).
Some of the limitations of this lens are similar to the other 50mm lenses (but some big benefits are added in this lens):
First, being a prime lens, you will need to move your feet a lot to compose your picture. If you are used to zoom lens, don't underestimate this limitation. It takes me a while to get used to it, and sometime I still find people looking at me wondering why I am moving forward and backwards. the good news is that most of the time, they don't think I'm weird, but they are actually wondering if I'm a professional photographer.
Secondly, the focal range of 50mm, which is considered the normal lens and great for portrait lens. but on many DSLRs which is not full frame (unless you have a full frame Nikon DSLR like the D700 or D3, then 50mm is 50mm), this lens become a 75mm equivalent which is in the border of a short tele lens. I actually like the 75mm equivalent though I often have to move backwards when taking picture of a group of people.
While this lens produces very sharp images at f/1.4, the corner show lower contrast. Sharpness and contrast increases further as you stop down to f/2, f/2.8 and f/4.
The big plus with this lens over the older 50mm lens is the AF-S feature which is auto focus system that is internal to the lens, very fast and very silent. This lens will please a lot of people who currently own D40, D40x, and D60, as they now can benefit from the autofocus.
Another big win is the manual override on autofocus mode (M/A mode), which will allow us to change the focus without having to change the mode to manual mode (this is pretty standard to most Nikon newer lenses but it's a first for the Nikon 50mm lens series)
I'm a bit surprised that Nikon didn't include VR in this lens since they add VR to many of their newer lenses including some of wider angle lens (e.g the 16-85mm, and the 18-55mm) which would be perfect when taking handhelds shots during low light environment (like concert, indoor sports, etc). And the price (current price) will be perfect too if this lens have a VR feature (otherwise it is a bit expensive).
If you are wondering whether you should get a fast lens or a lens with VR (Vibration Reduction), here's my take: In overall, VR does help a lot (as it will reduce camera shake) and will produce better/sharper picture than equivalent lens without VR (especially if the object is static). If the object is moving fast (sports/action) then VR feature alone might not help (depending on how fast the object is moving and how much light is available), and a fast lens often end up being a far better solution, even without VR feature as it will allow much faster shutter speed to freeze motion. Using tripod (and a remote) will substitute for the need of VR feature. In general I would recommend getting a fast lens with VR feature (and usually it is expensive) such as the 70-200 f/2.8 VR, but if one can only get for one or the other, then find out what do you want to use the lens for and then use the guideline mentioned here.
If you are wondering whether you will get the benefit of buying f/1.4 lens over a f/1.8 lens, just remember that the f/1.4 lens is about 60% faster than f/1.8 at its widest aperture setting. With this information, you can decide if the additional speed will justify the additional cost. The bokeh is nicer as well in f/1.4 lens but I think speed is usually the main factor in deciding whether to get the more expensive f/1.4 lens.
Here are the summary of pros and cons for this Nikon 50mm f/1.4G AF-S lens:
Pros:
1. AF-S AF-S AF-S (very fast focus, internal focus, and very silent)
2. M/A mode (manual focus override available on autofocus mode)
3. Very fast lens (f/1.4)
4. Very sharp pictures
5. Great for sport/action photography
6. Great for indoor and low light situation
7. Great for portrait
8. Bokeh is almost as good as many expensive Nikon tele-lens
9. Perfect for wedding photography (or low light with no-flash event). However, also check out the following lens for wedding photography (17-35mm f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, 17-55mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8 or the other two 50mm nikon prime lenses)
9. 75mm equivalent which can be considered a short tele lens (If you need more zoom, you can get the Nikon 85mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.4 or the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR). If you have full frame DSLR(like the D3 or D700), then this #9 pros is not applicable.
10. Did I mention very fast and very silent focus?
Cons:
1. Being prime lens, you need to move your feet a lot to adjust/compose
2. Being a G lens (no aperture ring available), this lens will not work on manual focus camera where you need to set the aperture from the lens)
3. Price is a bit on the high range for a prime lens
4. No VR. As VR will be useful for taking handheld shots on low light (especially if the object is somewhat static or if the photographer doesn't have steady hands when taking photograph)
5. 75mm equivalent with 1.5x multiplier on non full frame DSLR (many people find this is an odd range for normal lens). If you have full frame DSLR(like the D3 or D700), then this #5 cons is not applicable.
Bottom line: This lens is so versatile that I think everyone should own this lens (or at least one of the other 50mm lenses) in addition to all the lenses that they already have. Being a very fast lens, it will allow people to take action shot in low light that otherwise wouldn't be able to be do. And now, with AF-S, there is nothing to dislike about this lens (though in my opinion, this lens might attract even more interest if it has a VR feature).
Happy Photographing!
Sidarta Tanu
Many of us (including those who already own 50mm f/1.8D AF or 50mm f/1.4D AF as well) have been waiting for this lens for a long time, and overall it is worth the wait, and it is worth the upgrade to this 50mm f/1.4G AF-S. If you don't own any of the earlier version of the 50mm lens then you should definitely get this lens over the older 50mm non-AFS lens (especially if price is not much of a factor for you or if your camera body is a D40, D40x, or D60 which the autofocus with will work with those cameras as well).
Some of the limitations of this lens are similar to the other 50mm lenses (but some big benefits are added in this lens):
First, being a prime lens, you will need to move your feet a lot to compose your picture. If you are used to zoom lens, don't underestimate this limitation. It takes me a while to get used to it, and sometime I still find people looking at me wondering why I am moving forward and backwards. the good news is that most of the time, they don't think I'm weird, but they are actually wondering if I'm a professional photographer.
Secondly, the focal range of 50mm, which is considered the normal lens and great for portrait lens. but on many DSLRs which is not full frame (unless you have a full frame Nikon DSLR like the D700 or D3, then 50mm is 50mm), this lens become a 75mm equivalent which is in the border of a short tele lens. I actually like the 75mm equivalent though I often have to move backwards when taking picture of a group of people.
While this lens produces very sharp images at f/1.4, the corner show lower contrast. Sharpness and contrast increases further as you stop down to f/2, f/2.8 and f/4.
The big plus with this lens over the older 50mm lens is the AF-S feature which is auto focus system that is internal to the lens, very fast and very silent. This lens will please a lot of people who currently own D40, D40x, and D60, as they now can benefit from the autofocus.
Another big win is the manual override on autofocus mode (M/A mode), which will allow us to change the focus without having to change the mode to manual mode (this is pretty standard to most Nikon newer lenses but it's a first for the Nikon 50mm lens series)
I'm a bit surprised that Nikon didn't include VR in this lens since they add VR to many of their newer lenses including some of wider angle lens (e.g the 16-85mm, and the 18-55mm) which would be perfect when taking handhelds shots during low light environment (like concert, indoor sports, etc). And the price (current price) will be perfect too if this lens have a VR feature (otherwise it is a bit expensive).
If you are wondering whether you should get a fast lens or a lens with VR (Vibration Reduction), here's my take: In overall, VR does help a lot (as it will reduce camera shake) and will produce better/sharper picture than equivalent lens without VR (especially if the object is static). If the object is moving fast (sports/action) then VR feature alone might not help (depending on how fast the object is moving and how much light is available), and a fast lens often end up being a far better solution, even without VR feature as it will allow much faster shutter speed to freeze motion. Using tripod (and a remote) will substitute for the need of VR feature. In general I would recommend getting a fast lens with VR feature (and usually it is expensive) such as the 70-200 f/2.8 VR, but if one can only get for one or the other, then find out what do you want to use the lens for and then use the guideline mentioned here.
If you are wondering whether you will get the benefit of buying f/1.4 lens over a f/1.8 lens, just remember that the f/1.4 lens is about 60% faster than f/1.8 at its widest aperture setting. With this information, you can decide if the additional speed will justify the additional cost. The bokeh is nicer as well in f/1.4 lens but I think speed is usually the main factor in deciding whether to get the more expensive f/1.4 lens.
Here are the summary of pros and cons for this Nikon 50mm f/1.4G AF-S lens:
Pros:
1. AF-S AF-S AF-S (very fast focus, internal focus, and very silent)
2. M/A mode (manual focus override available on autofocus mode)
3. Very fast lens (f/1.4)
4. Very sharp pictures
5. Great for sport/action photography
6. Great for indoor and low light situation
7. Great for portrait
8. Bokeh is almost as good as many expensive Nikon tele-lens
9. Perfect for wedding photography (or low light with no-flash event). However, also check out the following lens for wedding photography (17-35mm f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, 17-55mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8 or the other two 50mm nikon prime lenses)
9. 75mm equivalent which can be considered a short tele lens (If you need more zoom, you can get the Nikon 85mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.4 or the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR). If you have full frame DSLR(like the D3 or D700), then this #9 pros is not applicable.
10. Did I mention very fast and very silent focus?
Cons:
1. Being prime lens, you need to move your feet a lot to adjust/compose
2. Being a G lens (no aperture ring available), this lens will not work on manual focus camera where you need to set the aperture from the lens)
3. Price is a bit on the high range for a prime lens
4. No VR. As VR will be useful for taking handheld shots on low light (especially if the object is somewhat static or if the photographer doesn't have steady hands when taking photograph)
5. 75mm equivalent with 1.5x multiplier on non full frame DSLR (many people find this is an odd range for normal lens). If you have full frame DSLR(like the D3 or D700), then this #5 cons is not applicable.
Bottom line: This lens is so versatile that I think everyone should own this lens (or at least one of the other 50mm lenses) in addition to all the lenses that they already have. Being a very fast lens, it will allow people to take action shot in low light that otherwise wouldn't be able to be do. And now, with AF-S, there is nothing to dislike about this lens (though in my opinion, this lens might attract even more interest if it has a VR feature).
Happy Photographing!
Sidarta Tanu
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
50mm 1.4G VS 1.8G (And I prefer 1.4G)
This is the second copy of 50mm 1.4G I have. I returned the first one, as it has a slight back-focus. I also returned 50mm 1.8G, for the same reason. Read more
Published 3 days ago by J Sual
5.0 out of 5 stars
Well worth it.
This lens is definately what an intermediate photographer needs in their arsenal for any portrait shot. Very much worth the price paid.
Published 8 days ago by Mr Leigh A Coop
5.0 out of 5 stars
Love it
Ordered it because of a friend's comments. Used it during a vacation in Mexico, and it works great. However, there is one deficit, that is one cannot zoom in and out for this lens.
Published 12 days ago by Ph
5.0 out of 5 stars
Love it
Do you wanna an amazing lens??? So you must buy this one! The dept of field is amazing. You'll just love it !!
Published 12 days ago by faelmayrink
5.0 out of 5 stars
Takes great pictures
The 50mm 1.4G lens is the 2nd lens I've owned so far for my Nikon D90 (the other being a 18-200mm). I am by no means a pro (just like the quality of pictures that come out of the... Read more
Published 14 days ago by God_TM
5.0 out of 5 stars
Nice!
Love using it so far :) it came in the mail very fast! Very sharp pictures,great bokeh,love having a low f stop
Published 14 days ago by Liz Dixon
3.0 out of 5 stars
Lay my hands on one finally.
The AF-S is really good; silent and produces a really nice bokeh ! Came on just on time for my use.
Published 18 days ago by Roger
4.0 out of 5 stars
Worth your money.
While not the best lens Nikon has ever made, this is a very good and welcome addition to Nikon's already famous 50mm lineup.
A 1. Read more
A 1. Read more
Published 23 days ago by A. Dude
5.0 out of 5 stars
Love It
A camera salesman recommended this lens to me for portraits. He was right, it's great! I use it all the time.
Published 23 days ago by Linda Bauman
5.0 out of 5 stars
Satisfied
Everything came exactly as ordered, and on-time. Loving the close up shots I get with this lens, and the beautiful bokah. Read more
Published 25 days ago by dromeyn
