It's not that much of a difference in image quality, but you do notice slightly more bokeh with the 1.4....very slightly. You can't really tell unless you have a side by side comparison. Having held both, the 1.4 feels like it's built a bit better....not that the 1.8 isn't. The 1.8 is just a bit more plastic-y.

Both lenses are really sharp, but the 1.8 is a no brainer because it's so cheap and it works almost as well as the pro lenses. I'd get the 1.8 and save your cash. You won't be disappointed. If you upgrade later, you can probably get most of that $109 back since it's a popular lens. Chances are though, you'll probably keep it.

awesome thanks :tiphat:

EDIT: Just ordered the 1.8 :) :woot:

:tup:

the "thrifty fifty" f/1.8 was the first lens i ever bought. i still have it if that tells you anything...

Good to hear makes me even more excited, it will be here tomorrow!

Amazon Prime FTW :excited:

Haha! I've never heard it called that!

I had the 1.4 and sold it for an 85 1.8. From what I can tell thus far, they are hardly distinguishable. The 1.4 had a smoother bokeh, but thats it. The 1.8 catches focus more I can tell you that! Got a $30 amazon gift card for my b-day, so I decided what the heck.

Lol the Nikon version of this lens will probably be my next purchase.


Sent from my iPizzle using magic and new-fangled science stuff

I've always heard it refered to as the nifty-fifty, although thrifty-fifty makes sense too.

I actually have both the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D & the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Lens. They're both great and worth every penny. The "D" is about $125 and the "G" is about $225. The "D" stays on my Nikon FM film camera because it's the only lens I have with an aperture ring. The "G" was meant more for modern DSLR's and has an internal focus motor, so if you have a D5000 series or lower, that's your best bet if you want autofocus. The cheaper "D" lens doesn't have an internal motor.

Same here. So in order of expense, it would go like this:

1.8: Thrifty Fifty
1.4: Nifty Fifty
1.2L: Ritzy Fifty :icon17:

Leica 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M: Crazy Fifty:eek2:

But you get $30 off Lr4 when you buy that lens. What a deal!
Too bad it's backordered.
Wait, what? Who are these people who are causing the backorder?
Or did Leica only make one?

I likey my thrifty fifty.

I think I'm actually going to give that el cheapo Rokinon Fisheye a try. A lot of people have good results with it.

8mm f/3.5 Fisheye Lens Review - Disney Tourist Blog

And I want to try out LR.

:eek:

rich bastards who wan't really blurry backgrounds or someone who really, really hates using a flash.

I can't even imagine walking around with $18k worth of camera gear around my neck.

It's construction feels a bit cheap, but it works. A friend of mine had one she let me try. I can't remember the exact brand, but I think it was either that one or Samyang? I think it's nice to have in the bag, but I definitely think it's one of those shots that gets annoying if done too much in a set. It's fun to play with though, and at a fraction of the Nikon/Canon lenses.

There are times when I just want to see everything, like when I'm at Disney. Or Antigua in November. :tup:

Same guys who probably have another 100K worth of camera gear in their bag...my guess would be usually a very rich guy, who has photography skills on my level (not that great) and thinks he will be better by buying the most expensive stuff.

Some truth in that.

I think Leica's are fantastic and true Leica lenses are near flawless. It's just way, way, way over anything most of us can afford. Truthfully, you do need some photography skills if you intend to buy a Leica M. You set everything manually and it's definitely not for someone who doesn't understand all the fotog jargon. I'd compare buying a Leica to buying a Rolex. If you've ever held one, you'll definitely feel how well it's made and appreciate the craftsmanship. I think the people you're describing tend to gravitate more to the top of the line DSLR's like the D4 or 1D with huge zoom lenses they like using indoors. They need something automatic in case they forget what aperture means:rolleyes:.

Honestly, if you want something which blows just about any full frame away in image quality, you need to go medium format. Medium format film is still readily available and a fraction of digital medium format. I've been contemplating getting a Hasselblad 500cm for some time now, but I've never developed my own film before or have a lab near me that does it.

Every time I feel like I'm starting to get a grasp on photography in general, I come to this thread and just stare at all the names and big words while my eyes start to cross.


Sent from my iPizzle using magic and new-fangled science stuff

You aren't alone.

Yeah, when I figure out what all this F-Stop and aperture stuff is all about I'm getting a Hassy with a digital back.

I'm just getting into it myself :tup:

Sorry:icon17:

:tup: i considered that at one point in my past. :ugh2: things change. And then change again:tup: i like my 7d. Just my style.

Porn:

http://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.ne...72036951_n.jpg

there's wayyy too much nikon in that for anyone to fap to it :shakes head:

Kinda like the fat chick in the crowd. Sooner or later… :roflpuke2:

BTW, just started using manual focus... f*ck auto focus.

I have issues with manual focus still. Cant seem to get it just how i want it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

That's what I like about auto-focus lenses with full-time manual capabilities. Best of both worlds.

Lens?

:tup: beautiful face. Love the blurred background. Weird hand...?

canon 50 1.8, shot at 2.5, god i love it! So cheap but killer! This was my first time using it.

gorgeous, skin looks almost too smooth tho, did you retouch or was she just that perfect? :D

yea that uglyass D4 at the back is definitely the grenade of the group, who's going to fall on it for us? :stirthepot:

Hard to believe that lens is so cheap and takes such nice shots. Somebody at Canon must have been on vacation when they were pricing this lens.