Should I purchase the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4? Is the f/1.4 worth the extra cost? I have to conduct a research in a museum and using a flash is restricted due to the sensitivity of the exhibit.
Thanks!
2007-10-30 08:14:04 · 9 answers · asked by kittykat 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
Then, if you can afford it, get the f1.4. Much better to capture the light. Also, use a good tripod. It actually should help even if you settle for the f1.8.
2007-10-30 08:23:14 · answer #1 · answered by Songbyrd JPA ✡ 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First of all, everyone is saying things about how expensive the f/1.4 lens is. B&H has the USA copy for $285 and the import for $260, but the import is out of stock. The f/1.8 USA is $115 and the import is $105. Okay, there is a big difference in price, but it's not like one costs $150 and the other costs $500.
I say this. If you WANT the f/1.4, find a way to buy it. You will lose sleep wondering if you should have bought the f/1.4 and you know it. It's going to dig away at you until you sell the f/1.8 at a loss and buy the one you really wanted in the first place. Again - it's not out of this world unaffordable.
Speaking from the other side of my mouth, though, if you work is CRITICAL, then you might not be satisfied with the lens wide open. I read in three different reviews that it is kind of soft at f/1.4, but really sharpens up by f/2.0.
2007-10-31 00:34:31 · answer #2 · answered by Picture Taker 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
For me, the 50mm 1.8 is plenty enough; not worth spending another $350 for a 1.4. The reason being, the 1.4 just adds a bit more low light shooting abilities, noticeable, but not worth spend that much more. Now the bokeh, or out of focus area, on the 1.4 is much better than the 1.8. It will make your photos look better, if you know what you're doing.
With all that said, you could always just buy the 50mm 1.8, and either up the ISO, or just but a cheap monopod.
2007-10-30 16:11:24 · answer #3 · answered by electrosmack1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer the 1.4, but the 1.8 is possibly the biggest bang for the buck in lenses. With large apertures, focus becomes critical because of the narrow DOF when used wide open. The 1.4 is a bit sharper when stopped down. (As are most lenses, including the 50mm f/1.8.) IMO, the 1.4 has better bokeh, which might not be a concern for photographing museum exhibits.
2007-10-30 23:01:40 · answer #4 · answered by Ara57 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you have the cash, go w/ the 1.4. I had the same debate w/ myself about a year ago, and I'm so glad i went w/ the 1.4. Now, if you can't afford the 1.4, the 1.8 is cheap enough so that if you like it, and think you'll get great use out of it, or funds become more available, you can just upgrade it! The 1.4 is made much better - quality, glass, and materials....
2007-10-30 17:15:57 · answer #5 · answered by Triple Threat 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Keep in mind your budget as well as your goals. Although an f1.4 is about 1/2 stop brighter than an f1.8, the price is more than double. If you have the $$$ and the amount of gain is worth it, go for it. Otherwise, go for the f1.8 as the quality of the final result will not be different if you use an ISO that will give you quality results. Changing from ISO 100 to 200 will more than make up for the brightness difference and you will be saving big money.
2007-10-30 16:15:37 · answer #6 · answered by Lou 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Buy the f1.4 - not only is it faster (marginally) but you'll notice the viewfinder is brighter, which aids composition. It also helps with focusing in lower light if you have to use manual focus. Too bad you can't find a Nikon f1.2. Unfortunately they are rare and expensive.
2007-10-30 15:42:54 · answer #7 · answered by EDWIN 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Definitely the f/1.4. It's not that expensive...
2007-10-31 09:34:35 · answer #8 · answered by vuxes 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
one point four, if budget permits,
just for the F1.4 for portraiture would be enough to get me going, a little soft is ok for short depth sometimes........dont lose sleep over it toouche dr sam
a
2007-10-31 00:41:58 · answer #9 · answered by Antoni 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋