Why so many choose 50mm prime lens??

[Gunjack]

For me, I use the 50mm lens quite often because of its low light capabilities, ability to select a wide range of depth of field, ability to freeze action in low light without flash, great optics and natural perspective as the human eye.

I just did a casual shoot on a rainy day and I didnt have flash, so guess which lens I used indoors? Hehe! The 50mm of course because its a great lens for location portraits.

 

[NeeKon]

For me, I use the 50mm lens quite often because of its low light capabilities, ability to select a wide range of depth of field, ability to freeze action in low light without flash, great optics and natural perspective as the human eye.

I just did a casual shoot on a rainy day and I didnt have flash, so guess which lens I used indoors? Hehe! The 50mm of course because its a great lens for location portraits.

beautiful...

 

[ArcticFox]

I don't know about others but, I don't really like the range. A 50mm on a crop body is too tight for me. That's why I am getting the Sigma 30mm. Apart from that, sure it's a sharp lens.

 

[ahboy168]

I don't know about others but, I don't really like the range. A 50mm on a crop body is too tight for me. That's why I am getting the Sigma 30mm. Apart from that, sure it's a sharp lens.

Agreed. i don't think i have enough space behind myself to back off to take picture in tight space.

 

[Snoweagle]

I don't know about others but, I don't really like the range. A 50mm on a crop body is too tight for me. That's why I am getting the Sigma 30mm. Apart from that, sure it's a sharp lens.

Same sentiments. It's just like 85mm on FF a bit too tight for me for portraits too, so 50mm is the ideal one.

 

[Paladinxun]

Hi bro, after reading all of above, I think its time for me to get a 50mm. Thanks.:thumbsup:

 

[Snoweagle]

Hi bro, after reading all of above, I think its time for me to get a 50mm. Thanks.:thumbsup:

Get one which is within your budget. Enjoy!

 

[NeeKon]

Casting budget aside... what is so different between original lenses and 3rd party lenses..

 

[Gunjack]

Same sentiments. It's just like 85mm on FF a bit too tight for me for portraits too, so 50mm is the ideal one.

For me I am quite the opposite, I use more of the telephoto side of lens, both on full frame and crop factor cameras, hehe... 85mm is one of my favourite portrait lens together with the 50mm, both are most widely used by me. In contrast I have difficulty using the 35mm focal length for portraits...

 

[Gunjack]

Casting budget aside... what is so different between original lenses and 3rd party lenses..

That depends on which lens you are comparing original and 3rd party with. Too general statement.

 

[NeeKon]

That depends on which lens you are comparing original and 3rd party with. Too general statement.

Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM and Nikon 50mm f/1.4


What about Nikon 50mm f/1.8?? Understand that this is much cheaper..

 

[Gunjack]

Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM and Nikon 50mm f/1.4


What about Nikon 50mm f/1.8?? Understand that this is much cheaper..

I have not tried the Sigma though I think it should be a fine lens, but I would just get the Nikon 50mm F1.4 AF-D for cheaper price and compactness, hehe!

The nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D is a very sharp lens and seems to have slightly less distortion than the F1.4 version but I dun like its harsh bokeh quality, which I am quite particular about, but maybe not to others.

But all these are just nit picking and through a good photographer, any of these lens would produce superb pictures, because the difference for 50mm lens should not be that big anyway.

 

[NeeKon]

I have not tried the Sigma though I think it should be a fine lens, but I would just get the Nikon 50mm F1.4 AF-D for cheaper price and compactness, hehe!

The nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D is a very sharp lens and seems to have slightly less distortion than the F1.4 version but I dun like its harsh bokeh quality, which I am quite particular about, but maybe not to others.

But all these are just nit picking and through a good photographer, any of these lens would produce superb pictures, because the difference for 50mm lens should not be that big anyway.

Thanks for your insights..

For those who are also interested to add this fine len to your arsenal.. I chance upon this web that do some comparison of lenses of 50mm focal length..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm

Hope this will also give you some visual comparison though it does not cover sigma f1.4, but it does give you perspective between the 2 Nikkor lens, f1.8 and f1.4

 

[shootjutsu]

Thanks for your insights..

For those who are also interested to add this fine len to your arsenal.. I chance upon this web that do some comparison of lenses of 50mm focal length..

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm

Hope this will also give you some visual comparison though it does not cover sigma f1.4, but it does give you perspective between the 2 Nikkor lens, f1.8 and f1.4

cool dey, i'm at the same link here now LOL.

 

[NeeKon]

cool dey, i'm at the same link here now LOL.

Too bad that dpreview did not cover f1.8.. else I think this website will give a more thorough review on lenses

 

[shootjutsu]

Too bad that dpreview did not cover f1.8.. else I think this website will give a more thorough review on lenses

haha no!
okay you go and read about f/1.4
at the last part under recommendations it quoted >

"If you want an ultra-sharp, ultra-portable lens for use in daylight and are on a budget, the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D has the same image quality when stopped down an extra stop. Unlike the 85mm f/1.8 vs. f/1.4 question (where the f/1.4 costs three times as much and is made three times as solidly) I see no such difference in mechanical quality between these 50mm lenses.

If you want to shoot in available light on a $5,000 camera, of course get this f/1.4 version. If you're on a budget, the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D is just about as good for one-third the price."

and under the f/1.8 page, recommendations it quoted >
if you intend to use this often in low light, then by all means spring another $160 for the 50mm f/1.4 D. I shoot my 50mm f/1.4 with my D3 in available light and I really like being able to shoot at f/1.4. For use in daylight, this f/1.8 lens has less distortion and is just as sharp.

In case you are new to photography, let me emphasize that this inexpensive lens is as sharp and over twice as sensitive to dim light as the $1,700 24-70mm f/2.8AF-S lens. The reason to spend sixteen times as much is simply to get a lens that can zoom. With this fixed 50mm you have to move forward and back to compose your photo. No big deal.

If you need super sharpness and a fast aperture than choose this over a zoom at the same price."


so, make your choice!
*i still cant make my choice T.T*

 

[Gunjack]

In case you are new to photography, let me emphasize that this inexpensive lens is as sharp and over twice as sensitive to dim light as the $1,700 24-70mm f/2.8AF-S lens. The reason to spend sixteen times as much is simply to get a lens that can zoom. With this fixed 50mm you have to move forward and back to compose your photo. No big deal.

If you need super sharpness and a fast aperture than choose this over a zoom at the same price."


so, make your choice!
*i still cant make my choice T.T*

I disagree with the comparison between this 2 lens about the zooming part. Sure you can move back and forth to compose your shot but the 50mm does not have the wide angle and telephoto perspective to include more or less of the background that the zoom lens can, even though its less sensitive to light.

 

[NeeKon]

haha no!
okay you go and read about f/1.4
at the last part under recommendations it quoted >

"If you want an ultra-sharp, ultra-portable lens for use in daylight and are on a budget, the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D has the same image quality when stopped down an extra stop. Unlike the 85mm f/1.8 vs. f/1.4 question (where the f/1.4 costs three times as much and is made three times as solidly) I see no such difference in mechanical quality between these 50mm lenses.

If you want to shoot in available light on a $5,000 camera, of course get this f/1.4 version. If you're on a budget, the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D is just about as good for one-third the price."

and under the f/1.8 page, recommendations it quoted >
if you intend to use this often in low light, then by all means spring another $160 for the 50mm f/1.4 D. I shoot my 50mm f/1.4 with my D3 in available light and I really like being able to shoot at f/1.4. For use in daylight, this f/1.8 lens has less distortion and is just as sharp.

In case you are new to photography, let me emphasize that this inexpensive lens is as sharp and over twice as sensitive to dim light as the $1,700 24-70mm f/2.8AF-S lens. The reason to spend sixteen times as much is simply to get a lens that can zoom. With this fixed 50mm you have to move forward and back to compose your photo. No big deal.

If you need super sharpness and a fast aperture than choose this over a zoom at the same price."


so, make your choice!
*i still cant make my choice T.T*

Thanks. I missed out this part.. Didnt finished reading it.. just go straight for the header..

 

[yilishengxian]

I buy it cos it is the only affordable f1.2 lens Nikon offers .

 

[shootjutsu]

I disagree with the comparison between this 2 lens about the zooming part. Sure you can move back and forth to compose your shot but the 50mm does not have the wide angle and telephoto perspective to include more or less of the background that the zoom lens can, even though its less sensitive to light.

haha yea. i read about this part at the site, quite disagree with it too.
different people have different thought ba. Maybe he think it is quite alright with the zooming.
:dunno: