|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on September 24, 2019 Pros: size and bokeh Cons: AF speed and cost Opinion: I go against the current compared to previous reviews... honestly I find the 50 1.4 G quite sharp, it has a great bokeh and small size. Its big problem is its new cost: price-to-yield ratio all in favor of version 1.8 (which has very good performance) and costs much less. Version 1.4 makes sense used: it is about 200-220 euros and at that price I think it can stay. The autofocus is not quick but it does its own. The sharpness is more than enough for all uses (including prints), of course if a zoomma to 200% you will notice that it is not as sharp as other competitors. Compared to version 1.8 and sigma art (which I do not own but tried) it has a more personal yield and much less cold. - I wanted to add after a few months of use (especially food photos) that the optics is outstanding! It is described in some reviews as a bottle bottom (I'm not technical, so I don't doubt that technically there are 50mm built and designed better) but looking at the results the photos have a "magic" and a personality that the 50mm 1.8g and the 50 1.4 art do NOT have. I'm not going to sell it anymore! |
  | sent on July 09, 2019 Pros: Lightness, clutter, blurry and natural Cons: Questionable sharpness, slow, frequent presence of b/f focus Opinion: It is a lens that does not excel at anything, but with positive characteristics maybe a little forgotten. You love her or you hate her. You love it for its not overly contrasted colors, to be absolutely light and compact. too perfect. The af is not at the forefront and you can see it. It should be closed from f2 onwards to have a sufficient sharpness and especially a decent pdc in focus, the bokeh is good but sincerely I prefer that of my tamron twins . Found a virtually illiterate specimen, suffered from front focus.I had to calibrate it in the car at a value of 6 on my D750. Never tried the little brother 1.8G and I can not make the comparison |
 | sent on June 09, 2019 Pros: Lightweight, versatile, cost of used, fuzzy, MAF Cons: Not received for my taste Opinion: Premise: I own the 501.8 G, in Sigma Art 50, the Sigma Art 135, I have owned for a long time the Sigma 50 1.4 HSM, now for whim I bought this Nikon 1.4, nital with still 3 years warranty x 230 euro.. I had done before, of course the comparison with the 135 is unequal x obvious reasons but x as regards the other 50mm sorry, this is pure magic, the photos are little contraended with the transition from fire to the soft and pleasant bokeh, muted colors and warm with a skin of the Face without too many imperfections as with the art that is sharper but in my opinion more aseptic, in other words is an excellent optics from portrait, was born for this and knows how to do it excellently.. Non-existent AF problems, as accurate as a blade... Maybe you should calibrate your autofocus from specialized centers, the problem is rarely the lenses.. Straconsigliato.. Everything else is weight and excess money. |
 | sent on February 07, 2019 Pros: Light, colors, bokeh, weight. Cons: AF can be improved Opinion: Excellent lens all to do that if understood, and managed (focus first), gives great satisfactions. Tending to warm colors, even after manual white balance, excellent in portraits and close-ups, beautiful even the BN. It's not lightning in the focus, so I don't recommend it for sports photos or action. Rated 8 |
 | sent on February 03, 2019 Pros: Size & weight, sharpness, auto MAF accuracy, Cons: Price Opinion: I have read conflicting opinions on this lens and still often negative, especially in relation to Brother F/1.8. I bought it about a year ago, paying him a lot less than the list price for a coincidence of events. I find myself well and I find it a great goal; My judgement is not based on the evaluation of the MTF curves or the production process, topics that little mastic and that I am interested in in relation to my conception of photography, is based only on personal experience. I use it constantly both on APC-S, and on FF, almost always for portraits set and in different light conditions, usually outdoors from F/1.4 to F/4.0 or in studio with Flash light from F/8.0 to F/9.0. In All these occasions the automatic MAF has always been sufficiently rapid and precise (rarely fails a shot). Maybe a f/1.4 is slightly soft but the final yield however is valid, while from F/1.6 on is a razor and with a fuzzy of all respect. It's not stabilized, but it's well... it's a short lens, it's not essential in my opinion. Then it is light and small and this in the outdoor sessions is a plus. The price however is high, so I would recommend it, but only to those looking for a 50ino light/practical and is really sure to have to use it in conditions that necessarily require (for various reasons) to gain a stop on opening the diaphragm compared to Brother F/ 1.8. |
  | sent on December 23, 2018 Pros: Light, practical and with all the great advantages characteristic of the category (light to throttle, sharpness-except F 1.4-bokeh, contrast, color and all). Cons: Although I never used the 50 1.8, I understood from a thousand opinions read (and a thousand photos observed) that this 1.4 does not offer such advantages to justify the much greater price. F 1.4 Soft, quite "veded" by spherical aberration. More acceptable from 1.6 or better yet, just from 1.8. Chromatic aberrations of bokeh (fringing green or magenta) to 1.4 and 1.6 generally impossible to delete in post (but appear only in case of hostile backlighting). Construction a little ' cheap ' and plasticosa. The fire can be difficult to manage, and with a certain frequency of errors. Opinion: When I took it, several years ago, it didn't cost that much and I had a promotional offer. Learning to know the limits and difficulty of use under F 2.0, gave me (and give me) great satisfactions, I read around criticisms that seem too excessive. Around in the daytime and with F between 2 and 8 is almost foolproof and the photos are killer-sharp. The bokeh, although not really the best, I think great. The few portraits that we shoot never disappoint me, apart from some occasional focus error, maybe more my fault than the lens. I detach subject-bokeh, even the of the portraits, give me generally little to say. In short, I keep it very happy, although I have advised several people to buy the 1.8 for the reason that is more convenient as a value for money. |
user148381  | sent on December 20, 2018 Pros: The "Pro" is that it is a 50 mm. Cons: Compared to its namesake 50 mm f. 1.8 Worst Opinion: If the list price is unjustified, if the construction is "ridiculous" if it is as compact as its equal but F. 1.8, if it suffers from sharpness etc. etc. All shareable remarks, then I wonder why not buy the Nikkor 50 mm. F. 1.8 Which costs less, has a better resolution, an equal compactness, an equal speed of MAF? Maybe to spend more? Maybe for a redicrous aperture gain? Perhaps for the mere illusion of having a better goal? If the latter is the reason then look elsewhere. Greetings |
 | sent on December 20, 2018 Pros: Good image quality, very compact, old-fashioned microcontrast while having an internal AF Cons: Price to the new perhaps excessive, ridiculous construction Opinion: It is a strange lens, certainly with an unjustified list price if considered the only IQ. It has its own why: it is very compact, and despite the large opening it can still be used in street photography without giving in the eye. It is not sharp, it has a gimp, but anyway if purchased around 200 \ \ 250 can give satisfactions. To be set aside immediately the idea of buying if you are of those that count the pixels, is not sharp, but still has a nice image quality (blurred, progression of the planes, colors). It suffers a lot the modern trend of "sharpness", and it is by many unjustly snubled. Of course, if you compare it to a Sigma Art 1:1 will be defeated, but you have to relate the surrender to Peso\\costo\\ingombro. In my humble opinion you will be satisfied for a carefree use, with a minimum of post-production and avoiding imposing prints. The construction makes you laugh, so much so this is the trend of Nikon, accept it. |
 | sent on December 19, 2018 Pros: Weight Cons: A totally disappointing surrender. Every Shooting is a gamble! You can not NIKON! Opinion: A total disappointment. I bought this lens with the aim of obtaining good bokeh and good photos even in low light. At the end of each Shooting the photos are always almost all mixed up; Many not in focus: the focus at more than 4m from the subject is almost always a disaster. In short, always a real chance to photograph with that slow. Maybe I do not know how to use or maybe I have the version exit bad? The Nikon is disappointing me a bit sincerely for so many reasons. |
 | sent on October 18, 2018 Pros: Size and weight Cons: Disappointing to TA, price out of your mind in relation to performance. It is no better than the 1.8 G model, which costs half. Opinion: While appreciating the colors and the pleasant gradient, I did not find it very well with this lens. I had chosen it for the portrait set, but the results were always too soft for my liking. Perhaps my specimen had not come out well.. But the cheapest model (1.8) was better on D700. (Not great on D750 and 850) |
 | sent on June 15, 2018 Pros: sharpness, brightness, size, weight, Cons: Lens hood ugly, plasticky and with Shell, lack of VR Opinion: Currently the best lens of my kit in terms of brightness and sharpness. The AF is not a splinter and has no stabilizer, but you do forgive with its 9 lamellae that give a terrific bokeh, from the weight and contained size, brightness and sharpness. It is the classic lens that if you buy it do not sell it anymore: I use it on both digital (D700) and on film (F5 and F100) from 2012 and I have no intention of selling it! Put backlight does not make a fold, and especially under this aspect known much the difference with other optics of my property. An "evergreen" lens that you must always have in your photographic kit, whatever use you have to do. Since I bought it in 2012 to €330 the price has risen significantly instead of diminishing................. something will mean? |
 | sent on March 16, 2018 Pros: Compact Cons: Price of the new off-market, AF slowness, Sharpness Opinion: Unlike other lenses, Nikon no longer deserves to be considered the first choice for a bright and quality 50 mm lens. Certainly better than the Sigma Art. It has a good compactness but it loses almost all openings as sharpness, and the AF engine shows the weight of the years. If you really want to buy it, look for it used, new Nital has a cost that makes no sense. |
 | sent on May 31, 2017 Pros: Compact and bright Cons: Too soft, too soft for a 1.4 Nikon home, slow and inauspicious Af, scary abnormalities Opinion: Personal opinion, maybe avro had a failed specimen in his hands .. this lens did not impress me at all. The game is not worth the candle, for the price you bring home sharply better lenses. Scary abnormalities and sharpness that does not improve even diaphragming. Frame too soft even in hyperfocal. Autofocus is slow and its inaccuracy has made me lose some shots. RnIf you may want to find it or if you want a 50mm look at the 1.8 G / D, which are infinitely better for half the price. THE |
 | sent on March 13, 2017 Pros: Good price performance ratio. Compact and lightweight. Good sharpness in the center even at wide apertures (f / 1.4-2), very good from f / 4. Cons: chromatic aberrations (purple fringing) at wide apertures (f / 1.4-2) in areas just out of focus. Unfortunately for him, there is the AF-S 1.8G, outstanding goal at half price. Opinion: I currently own both the 1.8G AF-S that 1.4, so I can do a confronto.rnVelocità AF: in a test-bench I measured 0.6s to 1.8, 1.4 to 0.8s. So this is slightly slower, but the difference in practice is optical irrilevante.rnPrestazioni: f / 1.8 is slightly less than the center, the difference is most marked at the edges. I noticed compared to 1.8 a greater presence of purple fringing in areas just outside High Brightness fire. The difference becomes less marked as it closes the aperture, f / 5.6 shots with two objectives appear indistinguibili.rnIl bokeh is equivalent to that dell'1.8G, except, of course, f / 1.4 this blurs the più.rnrnIn summary, it is a great goal, in my opinion a bit 'mistreated because the 1.8G is better at wide apertures. But it is the 1.8G to be eccezionale.rnrnAlla end I opted to keep it and sellKing the 1.8G because for my uses 2/3 stop more brightness and greater blur are more important than a slight loss of definizione.rnVoto 9 |
 | sent on February 06, 2017 Pros: Sharpness in color backlit bokeh made Cons: Price Opinion: Some people hate it, and there are those who love him, I find it very good, has a good seal against the light, the blur is smooth and color rendering is nice, sure 1.4 is not the best, but f2 it is already clear, I had turned 50 1.8g, but it is better only in sharpness at wide apertures, for the rest there are no paragoni.rnLa construction is plastic, a still robust and reliable plastic over time, moreover, the latest generation of Nikon lenses now make a good use, but this does not compromise the resistenza.rnIl price maybe a little high, but you will save money on used molto.rn |
| sent on December 23, 2016 Pros: Size and lightweight. Cons: very mediocre optical qualities, AF slow and spreciso in vile plastic construction Opinion: Taken in Kit with D 700.rnE 'built in vile quality plastic, which will wear with facilità.rnOtticamente has very poor performance: full aperture image is too "soft", but above all with a resolution too low contrast, and borders almost unmade, and this is due to the presence of sagittal coma in imposing form, such that the large openings with point lights in the field towards the edges of the images are not utilizzabili.rnHa slow AF and not so much preciso.rnIl glareproofed seems old-fashioned and definitely is not made well, it suffers a lot of flare and stray reflections at high lights in campo.rnrnQui there are RAW images shot with my D 700 showing the optical full aperture with sagittal coma that makes unusable rnhttps images: // www.mediafire.com/#tbewsvcbt8zacrnrnrnA my opinion, is absolutely not to be comperare.rnrnIo I sold quickly: better to buy 50 F 1.8 which costs halves and has better performance, or turn to third homes for f 1,4.rn |
 | sent on May 03, 2016 Pros: compact size, price, f / 1.4, light, handyman, bokehlicious Cons: AF is not a hare, plasticky Opinion: This is my first review, so I will tell you my experience with the 50 mm.rnHo purchased this lens when he still was using a D3200 with 18-105 (when shooting with the D750). Once it mounted 50 course was a quantum leap over the objective in kit: superior sharpness, bokeh, f / 1.4, a new way to photograph (no zoom lens, but fixed). Personally, I was impressed immediately with this view, so that the use of still FF.rnConsiglio purchase if one does not want to spend too much, considering the price / aperture ratio f / 1.4 (unfortunately I have not got to try 50 mm other brands). Construction is plasticky (as good lens Nikon price class), but at least it is lightweight and compact. Although not weather sealed, I photographed in the rain and never had a problem (for now). The image quality will not be at the levels of higher-end optics, however, I think it is very good in terms ofsharpness. |
 | sent on November 21, 2015 Pros: cost, light weight Cons: af afness, imprecision af, excessive softness Opinion: What nikon has ever produced 50 mm 1.4 phenomenal knows everybody, but this probably beat them all. The autofocus is definitely scarce, inaccurate and extremely slow, and seems to be equipped with an absolutely underdrive engine. TA suffers from chromatic aberration and is overly soft, sharpness is not home. And you soon say that it has a good bokeh when the resolution is the one that is .... Absolutely not recommended on 36 mpxl machines and especially on the 810, you will be disappointed. Nikon (as well as others) does not give anything, this optics is expensive but is not worth more. If you want to stay in the house, I will pass the 50 1,8G, if you want the top gun of the category, you have to go to sigma Art. But this nikon 50 1,4G avoid it, please a favor to your photos ... rnATTENZIONE: chi he writes is not an influencer or a guru, nor does one that downloads other images from the network to impersonate unlikely comparisons. For almost forty years, a passionate nikonist of photogrAim and photographic material and my opinion is not gospel, but only the result of empirical experience. The objects I write really buy them, I play a few months and if I do not like them, but always and in any case of material at the moment in my possession. I do not make the copy paste of reviews taken here and there on the net, if I'm talking about an item it's just and because I had in the house the time it took (at least months) to try to figure it out. I often go against current, but this does not take my sleep, as far as possible I try to help young aspiring photographers who give a weight to their savings. But, I repeat, I do not bring the verb ... |
 | sent on October 05, 2015 Pros: lightweight, compact, very sharp at long distances (a little 'less in the nearby), great focus, good resistance to the light, great price (when compared to other Nikon F1.4). Cons: AF slow, plasticky construction, lightweight slip fire near full aperture. Opinion: I never really loved this focus, as normal "handyman" I prefer the 35mm, 50mm, however, this has its perché.rnE 'ideal for photographing children, half-length portraits and for paesaggio.rnLo I also compared AFS F1.8 G and did not see any appreciable difference in sharpness, but this has a better focus and 3/4 stop in più.rnDa report a slight focus shift close to wide open, I solved with a -5 ( both that of D700 D800) rn |
 | sent on September 09, 2015 Pros: Sharp after f2.8, light, autofocus fast enough for moving subjects (on d750), construction. Cons: Focus Ring tiny, purple fringing vertical TA, some aberration, morbidino to TA Opinion: A maximum opening is not crystal clear, so I recommend version 1.8, the lower cost and performance very similar. Good gym for those who want to get closer to the quality of fixed: you are obliged to move to get a PDR that interests you. FF on a bit 'cortino for portraits in the foreground, on the other hand great ambientati also backlit. |
 | sent on June 13, 2015 Pros: Excellent quality with a good price, very bright, precise AF. Cons: At full aperture it is a little soft, aim to understand when you used to be able to take full advantage. Opinion: Leaving immediately by saying that this lens goes understood and studied to be able to exploit well. I consider it an optical double soul because if on the one hand (with apertures from f5.6 up) becomes "introspective" a sharp knife from which nothing escapes to describe the surrounding reality; with apertures from f2.8 to f4 we are in the classic range to make excellent portraits (using it in my case with a Nikon D90); down from f2.8 to 1.4 entering another dimension, dreamlike, dreamy shots for thought for good. Here returns fuzzy pasty although using it to TA is not at all easy. As for the AF it is correct that fast (rightly so). I got to use the optics with the legendary Nikon D700 and here happened to me a very strange: the lens does not want to pull more from the nozzle of the D700 !!! |
 | sent on June 03, 2015 Pros: Sharpness from f / 2 up, good focus, light and compact, great price Cons: Sharpness wide open enough (on D800), longitudinal chromatic aberrations, vignetting pronounced (as almost all fixed light on full-frame), visible distortion in critical situations Opinion: Overall good optics, with a classic design and built without the use of particular technologies, such as aspherical elements or nano-crystal coating.rnA wide open, with the resolution of the D800 and examining the files of 100%, the yield is not exactly the best, but just turn a bit 'and improves. From f / 2.8 up is very sharp, but already at f / 2 it is more than usable. It comes with the lens hood and a bag of tessuto.rnrnVisto I own both the Nikkor lenses can compare with the Sigma 50 1.4 (not art): the sharpness in the center at full aperture is a bit 'better on the Sigma, the corners instead wins the Nikkor. Longitudinal chromatic aberration are both showy but easier to correct the Nikon and the Nikkor autofocus is more reliable. The bokeh of the Sigma I find it more soft and then, to my taste, the better. Resistance to flare in Sigma is best, but if you use the lens hood also Nikkor has no particular problems. Overall I would say that it is uNo tie, but for practical use still I prefer the Nikkor, because of the greater consistency of yield due to autofocus a bit 'more precisely. |
 | sent on December 07, 2014 Pros: Lightweight, comfortable, made impeccable, precise autofocus and quiet, great price Cons: Chromatic aberration at full aperture solved by closing of a stop or hacking in post production Opinion: I switched to the version with ultrasonic motor after almost three years of use of version f / 1.8 D of the focal standard proposed by Nikon. The yield on the contrary of many conflicting opinions and negative about this lens really does seem engraved and I fully convincing. At intermediate diaphragms provides great clarity and detail throughout the frame. The engine is really af performance, begins to waver from f / 8 to follow but I do not make a problem. The optics trasportabilissima and generates a pleasant blur in TA and also closing up to f / 2.8. I also got to use intensively the 50mm f / 1.2 Canon (lens magnificent) but having bodies Nikon think this cinquantino makes his honest work at a lower price than 3 times compared to competing brands. I suggest buying, at least for the copy in my possession, I can only give this opinion. |
 | sent on September 11, 2014 Pros: Lightweight, valid in all circumstances, fast and accurate MAF in normal situations, great bokeh. Cons: Front focus problems when used with the flash on D800 Opinion: Due to its lightness and versatility is the first I use the most though I admit I felt the lack of 24-70 on several occasions. My main doubt is that very often, when I mount the flash on the D800 tends to go in front focus without explanation. I have heard of others with the same problem, but I guess it can of course also be tied to the body. |
 | sent on March 24, 2014 Pros: compact, lightweight, and very pleasant to TA at f4 I am comfortable on FF I leave it almost always mounted Cons: I think there is little difference with the 50 1.8 which costs even less, I wish it had a lower minimum maf, probably the worst problem is the AC TA Opinion: I feel very comfortable can be safely used on the right than on FF. I know I tested on the most economic d700 d3100 is on, I have tried to use inverted but not having the aperture ring is not easy making fuoco.rnper the rest for me it is a great little round, I go often only with 50 as the only optical, will not have a lightning af but nothing to complain about |
 | sent on March 05, 2014 Pros: Price, brightness, bokeh, weight, auto focus, sharpness Cons: Soft at room temperature (can be good or bad, depending), chromatic aberration TA, inadequate as Nikon 50mm tip. Opinion: My favorite lens, I do not ever staccherei from D800: the price is great for a 50mm 1.4, which is not particularly serious defect, but I think as the best Nikon 50mm is not enough. Again, I did not nothing wrong, but I think there needs to be a 50 mm higher (not necessarily 1.2, but if it were I would not complain), a 50mm by professionals (who would, alas, a price to be professionals). rnMa enough to speak of what is not, let's talk about what it is. RNE fantastico.rnPunto, finished chiuso.rnLa softness cha blends wonderfully with the creamy and pleasant blur that creates, giving each photo a dreamy and magical air. Autofocus is not the fastest I've ever seen, but it sure is the most accurate, and it is better that way, considering the small size of the pdc. Distortion and vignetting, both present, they settle with a single click, the distortion, it is a crime to remove a photo of this lens vignetting, about 6000 shots I've done since Ithe D800, at least half are with the 50mm, and there is not ONE single photo that has had to remove the vignetting brutta.rnÈ because it was a lens to love, period. |
 | sent on January 03, 2014 Pros: Incredible brightness at a ridiculous price, good sharpness already at 1.4, light, dreamy bokeh, small and compact Cons: Autofocus a bit 'slow but precise: the optic in question is not designed for sports photography or action, is a glass for a photograph brooding, intimate, even in the moonlight. However, the optics can be improved given all the technology of today. You are advised to deal with perspective with certain limitations. Opinion: My favorite focal length to which he dedicated a myriad of Nikon lenses but without having had the time to fully center. When I use the 85mm f1.8G feel a spell, with this 50mm f1.4 does not. A clean and simple optical scheme (ED lenses or no treatment to Nanocrystals, nor aspherical lenses), but no less effective. We must first understand this objective to appreciate it as it should. A 50mm f1.4 is not used for sports photography or action shots but for quieter, more reasoned. It is useless to buy a fixed considering this as a "handyman" ... The autofocus slower but offers more precision because this lens needs to know to work at night and no flash, and no one has ever given me problems in the photograph bed. Many complain about a certain softness to 1.4: as I said it is not the 85mm f1.8G. A 1.4 has a good sharpness, and anyway "sharpness" has never been synonymous with quality in photography. What is certain is that if one buys a lens ofthe genre for photographing sunsets or cats that sleep is obviously looking for a spectacular sharpness to give meaning to a photograph trivial. At full aperture, and ISO 6400 you can work in the moonlight without artificial lights. The bokeh is spectacular, the materials do not even look at them because they do not account for the quality of the lens: brilliant optics best a bit 'plasticky crap metal or tropical conditions? At the professional level optics gets along very well. It is designed to report a more reasoned, more sophisticated, exploiting the twilight glow, certainly not to immortalize ski racing. It also demonstrates the bokeh: delicate and dreamy, suitable sensuality of evening lights. Of course, the Nikon can do better when I use it I feel certain limitations such as slow auto focus or sharpness is not excessive at RT, however insignificant things. What amazes me is the lack of a 50mm "final" home Nikon ... The 1 .4 G has something that 1 .8 G does not have and vice versa, malways seems to be missing something ... For value for money has no equal. |
 | sent on November 28, 2013 Pros: Sharp already in print at f1.4, very sharp from f2.8 even when the monitor is small and lightweight, nice bokeh, nice colors, cheap. Cons: Distortion is not a bolt of AF but there's much worse, I did not understand what it is weather resistant. Opinion: And 'one of my favorite lenses even though my standard focal length is 35mm. Many complain about the sharpness at room temperature and in effect to monitor is not excellent, but I must say that in print (30x45, 12mp, 300dpi) the results are excellent. The problem then is caught fire saw the perfect little profondità.rnIn hand feels that the barrel and plastic, but overall not a feeling of fragility, it is also very light and this is a huge honor for those who travel or keeps the car several hours in the neck. The af is not instantaneous but I've never had any problems or missed shots, and often work with very little luce.rnProbabilmente is not the best 50mm ever made, but for 300 Euros which is the new offers brightness, sharpness more than good for those who print and not only see the pictures on the monitor, the reasonably fast af, lightweight but strong, pleasant tones and bokeh. |
 | sent on April 27, 2013 Pros: Optical light, quite cheap and universal, but not especially great pretensions to f 1.4. Cons: AF slow and distortion at full aperture. Opinion: Optics that I have used before on D90 and D800 now on with good results. The AF p a faster would be interesting as well as increased quality at full aperture. Using the Optical often at night for street during my travels and the brightness is important having to use quite quickly. Along with the 24 and the 85 are a nice outfit for the night, light and thin in the optical changes that need to be fast to prevent dust to enter and capture the moments. However absolutely worth the cost. |
 | sent on March 18, 2013 Pros: Good optical quality at f1.4, f2.8 rnOttima quality; rnAF very accurate; rnBokeh; Cons: AF slow, inaccurate rnGhiera; rnQualità constructive, very "plastic"; Opinion: For me, the build quality leaves much to be desired, even if you understand, having traded in favor of optical quality and price, but in his hands it seems really a "touch" of plastica.rnIo do not love him a lot, but optically it is a good lens, great for the price, autofocus while being very slow to 1.4 is very preciso.rnPersonalmente I find it a bit 'too contrasty, however, is right on I find excellent for portraits and ambientati.rnIl standard price, however, is good but not know if the advantage of light 1 .4 is enough to prefer the 50 1.8, which is spoken very well and it costs about half |
 | sent on March 11, 2013 Pros: Bright, crystal clear, excellent cstruzione, blurred excellent, very light Cons: Af not fast, slightly soft at F1.4 Opinion: I possess this light for over a year and I'm very satisfied. Used almost exclusively on the right (d7000 and D3000) performs very well especially with regard to the sharpness that is very good to excellent and F1.8 to F2.8. Used in any situation has always behaved very well; even in the sport despite the lightning it was not af 'behaved well. Obviously it performs equally well on fx. |
 | sent on November 08, 2012 Pros: Brightness, sharpness, size and weight Cons: Autofocus a bit 'slow, in certain situations a bit' long on APS-C Opinion: Using this lens on APS-C and gave me great satisfaction especially indoors or photos "on the fly" granddaughter. On these occasions I could appreciate the brightness (and the sharpness at RT) and accuracy dell'autofocus.rnViceversa I was not really at ease in using "tourism" where the focal I was often a bit 'long and the fixed focus a bit 'limitante.rnComplessivamente, given the price is not exaggerated, I think the perspective "must have", useful in many occasions, pleasant to use and qualitatively very valida.rn |
 | sent on October 16, 2012 Pros: Standard focal length when mounted on full-frame, solidity, 'brightness', AF quiet and precise, fair price for the quality' Cons: Maybe slightly soft when used at F/1.4 Opinion: I use this lens when I switched to Nikon About 6 months ago. I am immediately felt at ease with both the focal length and the brightness' superlative. I 've used a lot at all hours to make portraits and details and I must say that even if there is slightly soft would not rate this as a defect. The focal range at room temperature and 'really a knife. The blurred and 'flawless and pleasant to see. The brightness' to 1.4 allows you to make great pictures without raising the ISO. |
 | sent on November 11, 2011 Pros: Optical quality from f2.8 up remarkable Cons: Soft at f1.4 and AF is not fast Opinion: Although it is a little soft at room temperature and the AF is not at the level of the new generation of Nikon Prime, the optical quality of this lens, especially working between f4 and F7.1 is really notevole.rnUtilizzato on DX for portraits or industrial photography from the results absolutely remarkable with engraved lines and excellent bokeh.rnUtilizzato FX is a lens to do everything with a fine blend of retro charm and optical quality moderna.rnE 'a lens that though it gives great satisfaction it is quite difficult to use. The point of focus should be carefully chosen and often resort to manual focus to be more rapidi.rnNonostante is only a 50mm when used on a DX needs considerable attention in the choice of the PDC. |
 | sent on September 28, 2011 Pros: Optical quality, precise AF Cons: AF not fast, a bit 'of distortion, built a little' "chubby" Opinion: I got it in a kit with the D700. I had the previous Nikon AF 50mm f / 1,4 D and Nikkor AI-S 50mm f / 1.4 manual focus. This optically beats them both as clarity and pleasantness of focus. Between f / 1.4 f / 2 is clearly superior, then the differences become thinner until it becomes almost invisible. It has a little 'distortion and AF is not quite instantaneous but it has proven very accurate, and between the two features just prefer the precision optics so bright. Maybe it's not my ideal focal, I prefer some millimeters less or more FX, but Dx is a very interesting perspective for portraits ambientati. I did a quick test, between D700 + AF 85mm f / 1,4 D and D300s + AF-S 50mm f / 1.4 G and apart from the physiological difference in focus, the yield, such as sharpness, is not very different, all ' another. |
 | sent on September 28, 2011 Pros: Construction, clarity, weight, silent AF, blurred excellent. Cons: Distortion is just 50mm AF slow, soft to 1.4. Opinion: Focal standard for many years has been equipped with ultrasonic motor in order to be used on all new Nikon bodies, even those of low-end. What is missing is now the aperture ring, which limits its use on older but still good film bodies. The construction is very good with a ring maf correctly sized. The sharpness is a reference, but not wide open where, however, allows you to take home accettabilissimi shots. The focus is fabulous, relying on the 9 aperture blades. The AF, extremely quiet, it is slower than you expect, but obviously the helicoid of the maf, more like a macro lens, makes it very accurate. The 50 of the past were known to be very correct with regard to distortion, but this is now present and noticeable even though certainly not in an exaggerated way. The price is adjusted to the quality of the lens, but unlike the competition, there is provided the useful un'astuccio lens hood and soft. It 's always a lens that has its own natural use of FF, but that turns into an excellent 75mm remarkable openness on aps-c. |
 | sent on September 27, 2011 Pros: Standard focal length (FF sensor) luminossissima, excellent sharpness, AF silent, lightweight, great for portraits and still-life Cons: A little 'soft when used wide open, fast autofocus. Opinion: A lens that straddles the market for about 30 years, is considered the best optics "normal" house Nikon, this new model comes with the added SWM autofocus motor inside, it is therefore possible to use it in AF mode with the camera with no are equipped with a motor of their focus. (Es.D40 - D60) I always carry with me because it is very light and compact, I use it frequently for both photo reportage, both for portraits. Mounted on my Nikon D90 with APS-C sensor is a 75mm opening record. The best performances are obtained by working on the intermediate diaphragms, but it is really nice to use even at maximum aperture, where you create the blurred very delicate. Reading here and there on the internet seems to be ideal for the flagship of Nikon, the D3x. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
