50mm Lens?

Markok765 · Sep 28, 2008

I am considering buying a 50mm lens for Nikon. I didn't use my 50mm from my Pentax SLR a lot, but I just developed some photos shot with a Leica 50mm f2 summicron and they are beautiful. EX:

I now have a 28mm on the nikon and I love it for general photography, which includes people a lot.
What do you guys think? Should I buy a 50mm AF Nikkot [$150]?

bdial · Sep 28, 2008

They are nice for low light times, but otherwise I don't use mine much. If I were starting to build out a kit, I'd probably lean toward a fast 85 or so, YMMV.

Richard Wasserman · Sep 28, 2008

I think a 50mm lens is a great partner with a 28. The 50 allows for shallow depth of field when used at larger f/stops, which can be very effective and tighter framing. If it's in your budget, I say go for it.

Richard Wasserman

Poohblah · Sep 28, 2008

what body do you have? i use the nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AFD and it works very well on both my AF and MF cameras, the only caveat being that it has a loose focus ring and short focus throw compared to MF lenses. i think it cost me less than $300 new.

for MF bodies, there is the nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S which was manufactured right up until about a couple years ago. you can still find it new in places. of course there are still the old f/1.4 AI-S lenses which are great as well.

Markok765 · Sep 28, 2008

I have the F5. The F1.4 is a bit too expensive for me until I get a job!

Poohblah · Sep 28, 2008

hehe i hear you. the 50mm f/1.8 AFD is dirt cheap!

PhotoJim · Sep 28, 2008

I only paid $209 US for my 50/1.4D new (grey market) from B&H... five years ago mind, and prices have changed, but it still isn't terribly expensive.

That having been said, the 50/1.8D (and the non-D 1.8 that was sold previously) is a good lens. If that's all your budget will permit, you won't be suffering.

Anupam Basu · Sep 28, 2008

Any of the Nikon 50s down to the dirt cheap Series E for $25 or so will produce fine results. The AF-D is quite a deal new. In terms of bokeh though, I think the 50/1.8 AF isn't stellar. I use the Series E on my DSLR for precisely that reason.

Mike Kennedy · Sep 28, 2008

I do a lot of low light photography and find the 50mm 1.8 works great.

Dave Wooten · Sep 28, 2008

do you still have your pentax? IMNSHO those 1.4 s even the takumar threaded and the smc's are hard to beat. If I had only 1 lens it would be the 50 1.4 Pentax or the Nikon. If those were not an option my single lens would be the 35 mm 1.4 Nikon.

Markok765 · Sep 28, 2008

Dave Wooten said:
do you still have your pentax? IMNSHO those 1.4 s even the takumar threaded and the smc's are hard to beat. If I had only 1 lens it would be the 50 1.4 Pentax or the Nikon. If those were not an option my single lens would be the 35 mm 1.4 Nikon.

I just have a 50 F1.8 super takumar.

HerrBremerhaven · Sep 28, 2008

I have a 50mm f1.4 AIS and a 50mm f2.0 AI long barrel version. Of the two, the f1.4 makes for a great low light lens, though I prefer using the f2.0 long barrel. You can see one example of that shot wide open in daylight here. Just for comparison, you can see a B/W shot under low light with the f1.4 AIS.

I have also used a 50mm f2.0 Summicron on an M3 in the past. While I think the rangefinder approach is the main difference between Leica M and Nikon SLR, you might want to compare this B/W shot to the other link. This lens was traded for other gear years ago, and the unfortunately broken M3 has also been sold, making this shot from college the oldest shot in my portfolio.

I wouldn't directly compare Leica M and Nikon SLR, since the requirements of making the lenses is very different. However, I think Nikon do a great job with some of their late 1970s to early 1980s lenses. Be careful of sample variation; I went through four f1.4 AIS lenses prior to finding a great example. Also, I would gladly buy a Leica M again, though probably an M7, and more likely with a 90mm, a combination that the Leica reps loaned me a few years ago; unfortunately, I don't know when/if that will happen, since I shoot mostly large format now for my clients. Lastly, I highly recommend using a lens hood on whatever lens you decide to purchase; it will make a noticeable difference in your images.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

Anscojohn · Sep 28, 2008

Markok765 said:
I just have a 50 F1.8 super takumar.

*******
If it is a screw mount, you can get an M42 to Nikon adapter. You'd have to stop down meter and stop down the aperture to shooting stop, but for just a few bucks you are shooting a 50mm. I have an inexpensive Kiev-made M42-Nikon-bayo adapter myself.

Excalibur2 · Sep 28, 2008

Markok765 said:
I just have a 50 F1.8 super takumar.

erm would it be a fake, did Pentax make a 50mm f1.8?...... Oh! what do I know as my auto takumar is 55mm f1.8

Markok765 · Sep 28, 2008

Excalibur2 said:
erm would it be a fake, did Pentax make a 50mm f1.8?...... Oh! what do I know as my auto takumar is 55mm f1.8

Oh wait it's a 55mm.

waynecrider · Sep 28, 2008

If you go for the 50mm the AF-N series was a better build in the F1.8 lens. The new one is pretty plasticky. I could live without the D denomination.

salt · Sep 29, 2008

Don't buy the 50mm 1.8 AFD. I bought it because it was a cheap fast prime. Can't use it wide open or even near wide open because the bokeh is so bad. Most of the out of focus areas show up as little round circles, like someone went wild with ps clone tool. I use Canon fd and a Mamiya RB67 also and just assumed when I bought the 50mm 1.8 afd it would perform similar, it's not anywhere close. I only use my Nikon with zooms (can't afford the good prime lenses). Save your money until you can buy a decent lens.
Mike

Markok765 · Sep 29, 2008

salt said:
Don't buy the 50mm 1.8 AFD. I bought it because it was a cheap fast prime. Can't use it wide open or even near wide open because the bokeh is so bad. Most of the out of focus areas show up as little round circles, like someone went wild with ps clone tool. I use Canon fd and a Mamiya RB67 also and just assumed when I bought the 50mm 1.8 afd it would perform similar, it's not anywhere close. I only use my Nikon with zooms (can't afford the good prime lenses). Save your money until you can buy a decent lens.
Mike

What do you mean? I just took some shots with my 50mm F1.8 Canon EOS on my dslr and the bokeh wide open was what you described. The out of focus highlights in the photo were circles. When I stopped down slightly it resembled the aperture blades.

keithwms · Sep 29, 2008

Look at the new Nikon 50, it is supposed to solve the problem with the OOF rendering.

The best Nikon lens in that approximate focal length range is probably the 55/2.8 macro, which you can pick up used for $100-200.

I agree that the Nikon 85s are better than the 50s.

salt · Sep 29, 2008

I have thousands of shots from my Canon fd 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8, 55mm 1.2 and other assorted fd lenses, and a couple hundred from multiple Mamiya lenses wide open and I have never had the kind of awful bokeh that the Nikon 50mm has. It is sharper and produces better color than my Nikon zooms, but it now sits in the bag all the time. A waste of $125.00.

I primarily shoot portraits, existing light, wide open, any light or reflection in the background is little circles. I don't have that pronounced a problem with my other equipment. Others may not mind that, I find it too harsh.
Mike

Markok765 · Sep 29, 2008

keithwms said:
Look at the new Nikon 50, it is supposed to solve the problem with the OOF rendering.

The best Nikon lens in that approximate focal length range is probably the 55/2.8 macro, which you can pick up used for $100-200.

I agree that the Nikon 85s are better than the 50s.

Keith, the AF-D version? I may look into the macro, even if it is a bit slower. I do have mirror lockup and a good tripod now!

Markok765 · Sep 29, 2008

salt said:
I have thousands of shots from my Canon fd 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8, 55mm 1.2 and other assorted fd lenses, and a couple hundred from multiple Mamiya lenses wide open and I have never had the kind of awful bokeh that the Nikon 50mm has. It is sharper and produces better color than my Nikon zooms, but it now sits in the bag all the time. A waste of $125.00.

I primarily shoot portraits, existing light, wide open, any light or reflection in the background is little circles. I don't have that pronounced a problem with my other equipment. Others may not mind that, I find it too harsh.
Mike

Hey Mike, is yours the AF-D?

keithwms · Sep 29, 2008

Markok765 said:
Keith, the AF-D version?

No, the 50 G, it is AFS. It isn't out yet. Will be in December. Save your pennies! Would be kind of ironic to slap an AFS lens on an F5 though, eh. Even more ironic to use a manual macro 55! But it is a fine piece and you may find true pleasure with it; a lot of folks swear by it. Check the charts at photodo if in doubt. Too bad it's not produced any more.

IMHO Nikon is probably going to come out with a fresh batch of better designs now that the ZFs have proven popular, despite their price-point and lack of AF. Stay tuned.

Again, the Nikon 85s are better than the 50s.... and I think the Nikon 105s might even be a bit better still.

salt · Sep 29, 2008

Yes, it is the AF-D.
Mike

Markok765 · Sep 29, 2008

keithwms said:
No, the 50 G, it is AFS. It isn't out yet. Will be in December. Save your pennies!

But you may find true pleasure with that macro lens, a lot of folks swear by it.

IMHO Nikon is probably going to come out with a fresh batch of better designs now that the ZFs have proven popular, despite their price-point and lack of AF. Stay tuned.

Keith, is that macro also sharp at normal focus range/infinity?
I am not going to buy a G lens, if only to have more compatibility. I was also considering a F3 to go along my F5 as a ultrawide quick focus camera or a backup.
Mike, I don't shoot a lot of portraits, and I don't find the circles a problem. I was going for the lens to have a different focal length[for a change] and possibly as a lower light lens.

50mm Lens?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency