Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 27, 2009, 8:21 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default 50mm f/1.8D AF Performance

I tried 2 copies of this lens both of which displayed unaccepatble levels of softnessat f/1.8. At f/8, the images are crisp. I've read excellent reviews of this inexpensive lens, but cannot say that performance wide open is acceptable. I would appreciate any other opinions or experiences.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 27, 2009, 8:33 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

That's where the "inexpensive" part rears it's ugly head.

Perhaps you'd be better served by the 1.4G
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2009, 10:13 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelpee View Post
I tried 2 copies of this lens both of which displayed unaccepatble levels of softnessat f/1.8. At f/8, the images are crisp. I've read excellent reviews of this inexpensive lens, but cannot say that performance wide open is acceptable. I would appreciate any other opinions or experiences.
There are very few, if any, lenses that are sharp wide open and aren't sharp at f8. Some of the softness you may be seeing could be related to the shallow depth of field at f1.8. You should start seeing better sharpness at f2.0, and really I wouldn't shoot at f 1.8 unless absolutely necessary. It's asking a lot to have a lens be tack sharp throughout it's entire aperture range especially a lens that only costs $100
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2009, 10:42 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default

Thanks...it's about what I figured. Honestly for the price I wasn't expecting much, but just wondered what all the positive reviews were referring to when they(including Ken Rockwell) said this lens was a superior fast lens.

I have the 70-200 f/2.8 and it sharpness at f/2.8 is a 9 out of a 10...but that is a $2000 lens!

Last edited by Wingman; Nov 28, 2009 at 9:40 AM.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2009, 8:15 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelpee View Post
Thanks...it's about what I figured. Honestly for the price I wasn't expexting much, but just wondered what all the positive reviews were referring to when they(including Ken Rockwell) said this lens was a superior fast lens.

I have the 70-200 f/2.8 and it sharpness at f/2.8 is a 9 out of a 10...but that is a $2000 lens!

The 50f1.8 is an excellent lens. Again, it's pretty sharp once to get to f2.0/f2.8..it's just not very good wide open. Coupled with the price, it is an excellent value for what you pay for it, and I'd argue there is no better lens for the price. That being said, I hardly ever use it. I always find myself needing a little wider or a little longer. I'm typically indoors and the lack of flexibility just drives me nuts. I only have it for those rare instances when I cannot use flash.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:29 PM.