Nikon 50mm f1.8D vs Nikon 50mm f1.8 Series E version II. Which one is better?

[AezranHakim]

Hello fellow forummers,

Just recently, i got a offer for a unused new in box condition Series E 50mm f1.8 version II from a friendly uncle after we chatted about film cameras. His offer was around USD103 for the unit.

At the same time, a brand new nikon 50mm f1.8D is going for about the same price too..

Question is, which would be a better choice to pair with a Nikon FM3a? Is there any difference?

the hunt for a 50mm f1.8 AIS unit is not possible, thus only left with the 2 choices above, need opinion

 

[jochen]

Hello,
in my opinion the price is much too high. A used series E 1,8/50 in mint condition is sold here in Germany for about 30 €. Compared to the AF 1,8/50 D it is nevertheless the better choice as the focussing ring has a larger turning angle and therefore it will be easier to focus manually. The optics of the AF are better since the lenses are multi-coated. The series E has a close focus of only 0.6 m which is rather bad for a standard lens, most have 0.4 to 0.5 m, some even 0.33 m. If you can get an used older Ai 1,8/50 (not AiS !), you'll get the best 50 mm Nikkor for the FM 3a. There was sold a very small and very light weight 2,8/45 mm "pancake" Nikkor with the FM 3 a, which is a classic 4-lenses Tessar Type. This lens is said to be very good and can used with AF cameras with matrix measuring because of its CPU but in my opinion it is too small for the fingers to operate.

 

[André E.C.]

E series Nikkors always got the inferior label against other Nikon optics, while optically, this is questionable, as the optical designs were only slightly modified, the construction was indeed based on plastic, to provide the hobbyist and begginers alike, a more affordable Nikon price and therefore, prevent them buying thirdy party names, like Soligor, Tamrom, to name a few.

So, if you really care about construction standards, E series might not be your thing and as previously stated, the price seems a bit pushy compared to what's practised in bigger markets like Germany, with more time and effort, you can find yourself a better deal than that.


Cheers

 

[Chan Tran]

Either one would work fine with the FM3a and either is optically sound. The series E price is too much. I woud not put either one on the FM3a because neither looks good on the FM3a. Spending the extra money for the FM3a rather than getting an FE2 or FM2 then I would put an AI 50mm f/1.4. Some prefer the pancake lens but prefer the 50mm f/1.4 AI-S.

 

[Pumalite]

Forget the Series E. The "D" is better, but better even is a pre AI, 50mm f/2

 

[CGW]

Forget the Series E. The "D" is better, but better even is a pre AI, 50mm f/2

Why? The 50/1.8AFD is a great lens--on an AF body! Manually-focused, it's sloppy and very plasticky--in fact, it's hard to find a Nikon AFD lens as plasticky. Though over-priced(they're worth 40-50 bucks mint), the 50/1.8E is pin-sharp, very compact, and easy to focus--big surprise for a MF 50/1.8 lens...It would be a great match for the FM3a.

 

[Pumalite]

I believe this thing of the pictures is a matter of personal taste and I'm partial to pre AI lenses.

 

[eSPhotos]

Forget the Series E. The "D" is better, but better even is a pre AI, 50mm f/2

+1

I have/had f1.4 f1.8 and f2 versions of 50mm. In my opinion, 50mm f2 (mine is AIS) is the best.

 

[CGW]

+1

I have/had f1.4 f1.8 and f2 versions of 50mm. In my opinion, 50mm f2 (mine is AIS) is the best.

FYI the OP has a choice between the AF and the E series 50/1.8--that's it.

 

[pentaxuser]

with more time and effort, you can find yourself a better deal than that.

Cheers

Or a better uncle

pentaxuser

 

[MattCarey]

Or a better uncle

pentaxuser

Sounds like a lot. Dead Link Removed.

I don't really understand it. I like the series E lenses (I have the 100mm and the 75-150), and I'd like a series E 50mm for portability and weight, but I don't see why they should go for this much.

 

[CGW]

Sounds like a lot. Dead Link Removed.

I don't really understand it. I like the series E lenses (I have the 100mm and the 75-150), and I'd like a series E 50mm for portability and weight, but I don't see why they should go for this much.

Fast MF 50mm Nikons are getting picked off by micro 4/3s users. The teensy E series is near-perfect for them.

Agree about the E series. They're most often dissed by people who've never shot them.

 

[ColdEye]

The series E is nice, it's compact and produces nice pics. But in your case I'll go with the AF 50mm. Your uncle is pricing it too high.

 

[CGW]

The series E is nice, it's compact and produces nice pics. But in your case I'll go with the AF 50mm. Your uncle is pricing it too high.

Ever try to manual focus the wobbly 50/1.8AF?

 

[ColdEye]

Nope, but what I have used is a Canon EF 50/1.8 MK. II, and I bet that is much worse than the Nikkor AF 50mm. Compared to my Series E 50mm, the only gripe I have with manual focusing the EF 50mm is that the manual focus ring is thin. Being wobbly, or plasticky depends on the user, But in terms of value for the money, the AF 50mm is the way to go.

 

[CGW]

Nope, but what I have used is a Canon EF 50/1.8 MK. II, and I bet that is much worse than the Nikkor AF 50mm. Compared to my Series E 50mm, the only gripe I have with manual focusing the EF 50mm is that the manual focus ring is thin. Being wobbly, or plasticky depends on the user, But in terms of value for the money, the AF 50mm is the way to go.

Nope, but what I have used is a Canon EF 50/1.8 MK. II

Should have stopped there! They're awful compared to the Nikon E series 50/1.8. There's nothing subjective about the widely-recognized wonky focus "feel" of the Nikon 50/1.8AFD--a nice lens on an AF body. The OP has an FM3A.

 

[ColdEye]

Yes I know they are awful, that's what I said. If the OP can manage with the "wonky" feel, most probably the the AF 50mm is better. Plus If ever you want to get an AF Nikon film camera, you already have an AF lens for it.

 

[jdnewberry]

I have owned both lenses. My first AF nikkor was the 50/1.8, but didn't like how it focused manually. I upgraded later to the 50/1.8D, but still didn't care for how it felt. Although I own 4 AF bodies, I still tend to do most of my shooting in MF, so the feel of the focus ring is very important to me.

Long story short, I got rid of both of my AF 50/1.8 lenses, but kept the E series as a daily shooter.

As far as the E goes, it may be single coated but the design is so simplistic multicoating is not necessary. It is also one of the sharpest lenses ever made by Nikon. Compared to the 50/1.4 Nikkor, the E series is sharper when both are wide open (and with less distortion). The E is very sharp at f/2.8, but exceptional at f/4.

Some may say it is "cheaply" made, but I say "inexpensively" made. The version II you have been offered does have a few plastic parts, but maintains a very nice feel and has very tight tolerances. I recommend the E series, but suggest you look elsewhere for it. That price is WAY too high!

Also, if you can locate one, look into the 50/1.8 AI. It costs about the same, is multicoated, better constructed and almost identical, optically.

 

[lxdude]

I have owned both lenses. My first AF nikkor was the 50/1.8, but didn't like how it focused manually.

Pretty awful, huh? It was the first AF Nikkor I ever handled, and could hardly believe they put the Nikkor name on it. Given the slick, light and precise focusing Nikkors always had, the sticky focusing was appalling.

 

[olleorama]

I have a 50/1.8 pancake (I think AI, how do I tell the difference?), I rate it as very sharp. have done some 12x16" test prints from tmx from it. It blev me away when I saw them. I can't honestly see any difference in sharpness at that print size from my '94 summicron with the same film. I used it on a FM2N for a few years as my only lens (well, I had more, but just used the 50). The price is high though.

I can't understand why it wouldn't look good on the FM3A??? It's a slim pancake lens that makes the camera perfect for everyday carry.