According provided by lens Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) huge thanks to the store www.fotika.com.uawhere you can find a huge number of different used photographic equipment, including this model.
Review of Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan)
All Nikon 50-58 / 1.4 / 1.2 autofocus lenses
- Nikon 50mm 1: 1.4 AF Nikkor (first version, MK I) - the lens was produced only in Japan from 1986 to 1991
- Nikon 50mm 1: 1.4 AF Nikkor (second version, MK II, also known as the 'N', or the 'NEW' version) - the lens was only available in Japan from 1991 to 1995
- Nikon 50mm 1: 1.4D AF Nikkor (third version, MKIIIbetter known as 'D'-version) - the lens is available from 1995 to this day. There are two subversions that are no different.
- Nikon 50mm 1: 1.4G AF-S Nikkor SWM (fourth version, MKIVbetter known as 'G' version) - the lens is only available in China from 2008 to this day.
- Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 58mm 1: 1.4G Nano Crystal Coat SWM Aspherical (version better known as'58/1.4') - the lens is only available in Japan from 2013 to this day.
- Nikon Nikkor Z 58mm 1: 0.95 S Noct - The lens is available from 2019 to this day. Premium Lens for Mirrorless Cameras Nikon Z... It does not have automatic focus, but has a record aperture. Complex optical design with 17 elements in 10 groups, with 4 ED elements and 3 aspherical elements.
- Nikon Nikkor Z 50 / 1.2 S - The lens has been produced from 2020 to the present day. Professional S-line lens for mirrorless cameras Nikon Z... Complex optical design with 17 elements in 15 groups, with 2 ED elements and 3 aspherical elements
Fast standard lens, such as Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D - very well suited for working in low light, makes it easy to control depth of field, on Nikon DX cameras (and on Nikon FX) it is often used as portrait lens. It’s convenient with him take off, since due to the large aperture you can work with shorter shutter speeds. It is often said that the Nikon 50 / 1.4D (or a similar lens) is the lens that every photographer should have, his role in photo life is sometimes simply invaluable.
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) when focusing on infinity
At the moment Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D is considered slightly outdated, and passing the baton of aperture fifty kopecks to its brother - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4G SWM.
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) when focusing on MDF
The lens has fast auto focus. The instance that I visited on the review has a slight back focus when used on my cameras Nikon D700 и D80 (focuses a little farther than the subject). There is no focus mode switch on the lens body; to put the lens in manual focus mode, switch the camera to manual focus mode using the switch located near the camera mount. The focus ring is rubberized, comfortable enough and rotates 135 degrees. During focusing, the front lens does not rotate, and the trunk of the lens travels forward. During auto focus, the focus ring rotates and cannot be touched.
The lens has a window with a focus distance scale in meters and feet. The minimum focusing distance is 45 cm, and the maximum magnification ratio is 1: 6.8. The depth of field scale is indicated for the values of F / 11 and F / 16, there is also an infrared shift mark.
The lens uses small filters with a diameter of 52 mm, like a whale Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6GII VR II AF-S DX Nikkor... The lens weighs about 260 grams and feels like a solid, well-made product in the hands. On the side of the metal mount there is a black screw that serves as a mark for attaching the lens to the camera. As an option, you can purchase a Nikon HR-2 rubber hood, which is screwed into the thread of the front light filter.
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan)
Auto focus with Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D lens available only when using him on cameras with built-in motor focusing. An exact and complete list of Nikon CZKs that support auto focus with 'AF' lenses can be found in the 'Auto focus on Nikon cameras'. During auto focus, the camera and lens are quite noisy.
The lens has a manual aperture ring. To be able to control the value aperture from camera or for automatic installation aperture on modern central control valves, you need to turn the control ring to F / 16 and fix it with a special lever, which is located to the right of the marks aperture. If this is not done, then on a number of cameras, the display will display an error - 'fEE' (ring is not installed aperture) Some cameras having diaphragm rheostatallow you to control the aperture using the ring aperturebut only in metering modes exposure 'M' and 'A'. You can read more about this issue in the section on Non-G Lenses. Ring aperture rotates with clicks, the values F / 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16 are plotted on it, it is impossible to establish an intermediate value between pairs of numbers.
The lens diaphragm consists of 7 non-rounded petals and with it you can easily get 14 ray stars from strong (hard) light sources. On an open aperture at the edges of the image, the luminous points in the defocus zone turn into limonchiki (see an example) On covered diaphragms, it is easy to obtain nuts in the blur zone (see an example).
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan), rear view
Nikon has darkness and darkness autofocus fifty dollars and even more manual fifty dollars, and some manual options are still produced, for example - Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.2 AI-S.
Enlightenment and aperture blades Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan)
Personal impressions:
In fact, after a long use of the lens Nikon 50mm1: 1.8D AF Nikkor not really felt the addition of aperture to the floor of the foot (the difference between F / 1.4 and F / 1.8). Of course, F / 1.4 is better than 1.8, but I still tend to believe that you should not overpay if shooting does not require work with low light.
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) and Nikon AF Nikkor 28-70mm 1: 3.5-4.5D
At F / 1.4, the lens is not as sharp as we would like it to be, but it is noticeably chromate. Sharpness in the center of the frame becomes very good at F / 2.0, and at the edges of the frame somewhere at F / 4-5.6. In general, there is nothing unusual in the image quality of the standard fifty kopeck piece. Personally, I didn't like a little that the lens slightly yellows, which can be seen even in the optical viewfinder, perhaps I got such a copy.
Nikon has not updated the optical design of this lens, consisting of 7 elements in 6 groups, for a very long period. This scheme was first implemented in the Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4 (AI) lens back in 1977 and was replaced by a new one, consisting of 8 elements in 7 groups, in the model Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4G SWM already in 2008. Apparently, the thirty-year-old production of lenses on such an optical scheme has some serious reasons, of which I personally single out a rather pleasant 'drawing' of the lens.
Also, Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) is one of Nikon's fastest autofocus lenses, as Nikon doesn’t make anything “stronger” for DSLR cameras than f / 1.4. Plus, this kid is the cheapest autofocus lens with F / 1.4 :).
On Nikon DX cameras EGF lens is 75mm.
Here link to the archive with the originals - 562 MB, 31 photos in .NEF format (RAW) from cameras Nikon D700 (FX) and Nikon D80 (DX).
Prices
Real prices for the lens in popular online stores can look at this link, or in the following price block:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D on the ZK
Results:
Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.4D (made in Japan) is an excellent and very successful fast lens, it will help a novice photographer to understand and learn how to work with depth of field, and a professional to take wonderful photos :).
You can read more information about other autofocus fifty dollars here.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
50mm f / 1.4D AF Nikkor, will it auto focus on nikon d3100 &
will not be
:)))
With attentive sinking I watched pictures 1,4 ... It is artistic, they can make beautiful ... But 1,8 is already for those who ask whether it is possible to attach it to 3100 with focus and the like
Will it automatically focus on the Nikon d90?
Yes
Work on the D90, and on any other cameras with a screwdriver it will be.
I had a Nikkor 50 / 1.4D Chinese assembly. Sold and do not regret.
Crop factor, just a smaller sensor than a full-frame one. It is not clear who invented this, which increases the focal length on cropped matrices. The focal length does not change, but the image size will be smaller. A cropped sensor is worse than a full-frame sensor, since it cannot accommodate a full-frame image, as in normal cameras with a full-frame sensor. The point is that you have to move further from the subject to fit the entire image into the frame size, like a full-frame sensor. Accordingly, the "bokeh" effect is also much worse than that of a full-frame sensor, since you do not shoot a face close, but move further away so that it completely fits into the frame.
There is only one conclusion, a cropped matrix is the worst option in all respects compared to a full-frame one. The camera has a smaller viewfinder. And I also don’t understand why the video function is being pushed into the camera. As a result, the matrix is forced and overloaded with unnecessary video processing. As I understand it, the company for the manufacture of copiers in the person of "Canon" made a multifunctional gadget out of a camera. and the rest of the photo companies were led to this marketing move and also began to make copier-pans-coffee makers from cameras.
Very good cropped CCD matrices on Nikon D50 and Fuji S5pro. Nikon just had to increase precisely these matrices to full-frame and the topic would be closed. And now all this new plastic junk is not even needed for nothing. There is no difference now in cameras. The quality has become very poor.
I myself took a photo earlier on a "CONTAX", lens Karl Zeiss 1,4. Then he switched to Nikon.
Write this mutoten to Nikon Corporation. than snot breed here
Spasibo Oleg, y nas i tac many soplesms :-)
It used to be difficult to shoot on small-format film, since printing a 20x30 cm photograph from a negative was a limit of possibilities and a high-quality lens was everything. i.e. a nikkor 50 mm lens with aperture of 1,4 or 1,8 is very good, but its effectiveness is fully manifested on a full-frame sensor. the whole system is now aimed at the reporting version of the cameras, although for example I don’t need the 600 frames per second function, bracketing and other garbage at all. I work with purely mechanical settings, not automatic ones. I do not need video recording, zhps, built-in flash, bluetooth well, and that kind of garbage.
I would like a 6x7 cm matrix and fully manual settings, a short shutter speed, and a short synchronization shutter speed, a metal case, a pentaprim with 100% frame coverage, and a sane price for such a camera.
"The Marriage" N.V. Gogol
all new cameras resemble crossover cars in comparison. Expensive to maintain, no SUV, no frame, no differential lock, no hand-outs, in short, there is not a damn thing except for all the plastic bells and whistles and the high price for it, Mr.
and how then to take money out of a consumer’s pocket if you give it at once everything that is really necessary and not yet expensive?
good comment
not for you to argue on such deep topics.
Here, Mark, found almost what you need: - The online store offers Hassel H5d-60. True, the matrix is too small, only 4 x 5,4 cm (the crop is shorter), and the ISO was pumped up with exposure. But the price is just ... Inexpensive ... "Only" two three hundred lemma. And the most touching is the button “buy in one click” located just below the price. That is, apparently, it is assumed that during the next nightly Internet surfing, after thinking for a couple of seconds ... PS I apologize to Arkady for the off-topic comment.
Absolutely agree with you
Thank you!
I really like the Nikon FM2, Nikon D4, Fujifilm FinePix S3 S5 Pro, Mamiya RB67, Hasselblad 503CW cameras.
Arkady!
Please give some advice.
Christmas is coming soon. Night service, candles.
I have Nikkor 85 1.8 G. I tried to shoot in the same conditions - it's impossible. The darkness is dark, because you have to set the shutter speed to 1/160, although at 1.8 the lens is very sharp.
I wanted to sell 85 and buy 28 1.8 to win the shutter speed. But until it turned out to find a buyer.
I’m thinking: maybe I’ll buy this 50 1.4 D, maybe it will help me more than 85?
With a tripod in a crowded temple would be impossible.
Waiting for an answer!
Or just lend 35 1.8 DX?
And 50 1.4 and 35 1.8 will give the same gain in exposure, about a step.
Moreover, 50, as I understand it, is usually soapy at 1.4, and 35 is quite normal in the open.
In general, yes, although I won’t say for 50, I am superficially familiar with it.
And why rest against shutter speed 1 \ 160? Set the shutter speed slower, for example, 1/125 or 1/80, increase the sensitivity (ISO). At 1,8 on any lens, you will have the same exposure.
Oh, the grease will work out. I didn’t set a short shutter from a good life.
At half a milliard by 1/125 you need to have very shaky hands to make a stir. You can quite confidently shoot at 1/60. If you don’t do the “run and shoot” reportage, then instead of playing with glasses it is better to buy a monopod.
This is not at half speed, but at 85 and crop. 1/160 limit, then there will be grease
85 and 28/35 is a rather noticeable difference in focal lengths, respectively, in perspective. You can get a win in one, but a loss in another. A recent case: I shoot artists for myself at a street concert with a simple 70-300 TV set, walked away from the crowd, found a hill, climbed in and photograph at 200-300 mm, come close and shoot at 70 mm is not an option, because the crowd, but even more important that the scene is high and the shots are not at all in the angle that I wanted. I go back and shoot people on the stage at the same level as myself, and the angle is better than near the stage, and people's heads do not climb into the frame. In moments when 200-300 mm is not given because of the shake, I shoot at 70 mm with the expectation of subsequent cropping. But framing may or may not help, so if I only had a 70mm lens, it would be more difficult for me to get the photos I want than with a darker, but higher focal length. But this applies to a certain situation. In a different situation, a smaller focus would be preferable. This is because it is not always possible to compensate for the difference in focal length with your feet. Therefore, if a fix, then it is better not to change, but to take in addition. So change 85 to 28/35, evaluate the new lens in some shots, for example, in a small room, but 85 will be sorely lacking for outdoor portraits. 28/35 in a church will allow you to shoot more, but 85 may allow you to shoot from a more favorable angle.
Hey. But what about comparing Nikon AF 50mm 1: 1.4 D with YONGNUO YN 50 mm YN50mm f / 1.8 AF ??
just available YONGNUO YN 50 mm YN50mm f / 1.8 AF and is it worth buying Nikon AF 50mm 1: 1.4 D? will be used with Nikon d7200
Believe me, friend, you better throw this young yangnau, but buy Nikon. He owned this junk, barely got rid of it.
The previous comment contains emotions, but not facts. In fact: YN50 1.8 and Nikkor 50mm 1.4D are two lenses with the same focal length, but different classes. If you just need an inexpensive fifty-kopeck piece from Nikon, then this is the Nikkor 50mm 1.8D. If you need a good 50mm Nikon aperture lens, this is the Nikkor 1.8mm 50G. As for this Nikkor 1.4mm 1,4D, it is a good lens, but not balanced. At 1,8-1,8 without sharpening, it softs. At 2,2-1.8 in sharpness it is inferior to the Nikkor 1.8D, 1.4G, 2,5G at similar values. Starting from F = 2,8-1,8 it gives excellent sharpness and color rendering, better than 1,8D and even 1.8G. It does not tolerate the counter better than 1.4G and 1,8G. Overall, cheap and good - 50D, with YN1,8 motor, average price and very good - 1,4G, high price and excellent - 1,4G. And XNUMXD compromises and the need to adjust. I like it for its nuances at a not very high price, but I think that many will be rather disappointed.
You can’t say better
Forget about yagu at 7200. They are not for multi-pixel crop. I sold my 35mm, which was very soapy on the crop, to a man with a D700. When checking, he was amazed at the transformation - the soap was gone. These Chinese do not pull small-pixel matrices, no matter how they are praised here.
Nobody praises, but shares experience. In my experience of using the YN50 and YN35 on a 24MP crop sensor, no “pull” or “no cover” was noticed. But this is a subjective assessment that may be wrong. A more objective one can be made. YN50 for Canon and Nikon have already sold several thousand - on Ali you can sort the offers of these glasses by the number of orders. And then you can read specific reviews of specific buyers. That is, you can see the reviews of both satisfied and with pictures from them, as well as dissatisfied with a description of the reasons for dissatisfaction. So, the percentage of negative reviews in which claims are made about the quality of manufacture and operation of the lens or the quality of the picture itself, well, frankly, is low. It still means something.
specially opened here a review of the YN50mm. 3 pages of comments, and only 1 photo from the reader. probably it’s still not very common, and is bought more like a toy
in general, the "tacit recognition" of the Polo D7500 with its 35 megapixels is still being sold on aliexpress
On Ali, the majority rate it just to close the delivery. And if you don’t like it, it’s usually too lazy to write, a lot appears on the OLH or Avito. Judging by the constant appearance of new lenses for sale, for some reason they do not take root. And they are mainly bought by the owners of whale zoom. In comparison with them, they are certainly better or at the same level, but they blur the background. Cool. The Chinese 35 mm lost to Nikonovsky, full of dust in everything except the purple halos. On it they are almost absent in the open, but there is no Nikon's sharpness.
In addition to those who just need to close delivery to Ali or comment on anyway, this blog is always filled with people who understand photography and give adequate information. If the lens were useless out of a thousand who bought it, at least a hundred reviews would be about it.
Denis, there are several modifications of the YN50, respectively, from each of them there are photos of Arkady, there are opinions of users and owners. And there is no need to equate No-name products like Polo camera-player and YN products - they are not the same thing. YN makes good stuff for the mainstream. I would not refuse the same lens, released, for example, in Krasnogorsk or Kazan. But there are none. I will add that in China there are also very serious (in fact, top-end) optics, for example from Zhongyi and Venus Optics (you can, by the way, have a look at their price tags).
Vitaly, describe specifically what your YN35 lost to Nikonovsky? Again, only emotions and no specifics are obtained.
It is enough to read the review on 35 - already described. Sharpness at the level of a whale on the open - native is much sharper. Fixes are bought to increase the quality of photos. And here you have to press the diaphragm quite hard to compare with the sharpness of the native on the open. Lazy focusing when, when changing an object, the lens does not want to refocus with a slight change in the distance, you have to press the button several times for reliability - the native will always refocus. Although the topic has already shown the reason - a conventional collector motor with a gearbox with speed control on the blades is installed. Quite an inaccurate piece with a large step. Yes, and dusty with coal and copper dust. At dusk it is difficult to focus, despite the high aperture. As I already wrote, he won only because of the almost absence of frejing, which, however, can be easily removed in the editor. This is a toy that performs well on a large pixel and full frame. Maybe someone comes across excellent copies, but this is not a reason to write that they are all good.
Vitaly, you dealt with YN35. YN35 and YN50 are different lenses, differing not only in focal length. There are YN85 and YN100 - completely different. YN's fifty-kopeck piece is the most working of all for a modest price. The presence of some shortcomings, incl. infrequent loss of connection with the camera, lack of profiles, etc. takes place.
As for YN35, I totally agree with Arkady. Nikkor 35 1.8 DX for crop is slightly better, but they have similar diseases, in particular, focus misses and good, but not the most outstanding sharpness and color rendition in the open. Only the YN35 is full frame, and camera compatibility is always a risk for a third party lens. If you don't want to risk it, take your family with a guarantee.
The fact of the matter is that, as you wrote earlier on the whale, there is a difference, and at 100% crop the whole image is like porridge, that is, the whale doesn’t even go to the 12-megapixel matrix. In the lens, image plastic and high resolution are important and not just sharpness like in plastic whales of any company
Most likely, the fix for a full frame is expected at the open aperture to resolve all 24 megapixels from the cropped matrix when focusing at infinity.
YN is YN, with its own compatibility and the number of defects in the assembly. I point out all this in the reviews.
Not a pebble in your garden. Maybe some single copies can do it, but mine could not. At the same time, it showed good sharpness on the D700. And on D5100 refused to focus - front focus on 1! meter with a focusing distance of 3-4 meters. That's how he is, youngnow.
I'm not talking about myself, but about the lens. By the way, in the comments there is also information that there are “dark” lenses (with a real T of about T / 5.6).
Yesterday I shot in the studio on the D5300 (with its 24 megapixels without an AA filter) and nikon 35 / 1.8G - it pulls 24 megapixels very weakly, and its speed is also not so hot, and the freigging, as indicated, is really strong. Apparently also not the best option. Yes, and I know from myself that my native 35 / 1.8DX has copies with a back / front (a common sore for them).
Therefore, if you want to save money, choose carefully and thoroughly :)
Why not expect at an open resolution all 24MP at infinity from Helios 81H? Not infrequently scolding YN50 offer exactly G81H as an alternative. So the very good G81N is in fact optically weaker than the YN50, has worse enlightenment, has no automation (no motor for autofocus, no aperture adjustment from the camera, no metering, no transmission of parameters to the camera). For motorless cameras, the YN50 remains a cheap and working option. Then everyone decides for himself how much he is willing to spend and what exactly.
From 81n is also not to be expected. I probably can count on the fingers fifty dollars, which in the open can overcome 24 megapixels.
And which fifty dollars?
I bought from youngnuo 85 mm for Canon. I got a defective copy, which became sharp in the center only after closing to f / 8. Explicit marriage. Sent back to China and the seller completely returned the money to me. With previously acquired 35mm and 50mm problems to the optics was not. I suppose that there are a lot of used ones that saw problems as a result of use, and are trying to get rid of it. I want to say that, based on my experience, I assume that this Chinese manufacturer has a high percentage of rejects and the purchase of a lottery.
Comrades, explain to me nonsense how a lens can have front- or back-focus ... unless there are phase focus sensors in it, and not in a carcass ... this carcass is mistaken when its focusing system signals that the object is in focus ... in the very lens, the focusing motor only drives the lens back and forth until the carcass detects that the best sharpness has been achieved.
The optics are not perfect, they have a variation in manufacturing, for adjusting the AF, a correction factor is written to the lens processor, which is read by the camera and taken into account when focusing.
I use this lens in conjunction with Nikon D7000 and am completely satisfied with the result! For thoughtful, portrait photography, it is the most it. (I shoot only in M-mode) When vain shooting, there are many mistakes. Well this is ... You have to be able to work with fixes. A big plus is its small size, which makes it even more mobile. For three years with them, and it is reliable as a tank, without any complaints in work. (I attach a photo from it to the D7000) The next one is 85mm 1.8 G, as I want even more blur.
I use this lens in conjunction with Nikon D7000 and am completely satisfied with the result! For thoughtful, portrait photography, it is the most it. (I shoot only in M-mode) When vain shooting, there are many mistakes. Well this is ... You have to be able to work with fixes. A big plus is its small size, which makes it even more mobile. For three years with them, and it is reliable as a tank, without any complaints in work. Next up is the 85mm 1.8 G, as I want even more blur.
Oh yeah, I'll see a pro, a lot of misses due to fixes, and a larger blur of 85mm 1,8 than from 50mm 1,4. With such knowledge you only on M and shoot!
Hello.
I downloaded the archive from the link https://cloud.mail.ru/public/105b6e08f61e/nikon-50-1-4-japan.rar
It is good that such information is presented to us. The Nikon D700 has excellent sharpness and background blur, which is understandably a large aperture. It is not clear why compare with the Nikon D80 where the diaphragm is already covered. Even with a covered aperture, we don't get that sharpness. What we see in the full frame is almost twice as much is understandable. But the centers of the image with the same or similar quality of the matrix should be identical. What conclusion can be made? The quality of the Nikon D80 sensor cannot realize the capabilities of this lens.
Everything is simpler. The D700 has the maximum sharping, the D80 is zero. If you are looking for a sharp 1.4 - see version G.
For valentine.
Different sharping. Photos from the D80 are not interesting. Why the comparison is not clear. I have 7100 and have 50 / 1,8d. I bought based on the transition to the FF. But so far in thought. I did not try to set crazy sharping, there is photoshop. The sharpness is very good. How will he be on the ff question. And in general, your opinion about the transition to FF?
Vitaly, excuse me, but the photos with the D80 at a closed aperture are just very good and correctly characterize this lens. I believe that 1.4D is a professional glass that is unfortunately not very balanced. He has a wonderful picture with 2.8, with which no 1,8D or even 1,8G can compare. On diaphragms 1,4-2,2 the glass is frankly weak.
On the transition to FF: yes, FF is better in almost all aspects related to the quality of the final image. However, as an ordinary amateur, I find it impractical for myself. The improvement in the quality of the picture will consist in the nuances, which are, of course, important for me, but at the same time remain nuances anyway. At the same time, the price of the issue and ease of use are too high for non-professional use. I do not look at naked carcasses, but evaluate the system as a whole, with a set of optics and light. Therefore, my choice is a crop with a set of optics (zooms - shirik - standard - telephoto + light fixes 35 - 50 - 85) + light. A full frame is both expensive and rather bulky for me. I'm afraid that I would take too much care of this system and shoot very little on it.
Valentine!
Thanks for the answer. I understand your thoughts, but I do not agree with everyone. This is normal. You write to protect the system. If a new carcass with its resource, as for me, 20-000 a year, it will last for many years. It just becomes obsolete morally and technically. Of course, FF is more expensive, bulkiness is an argument for girls. About light fixes; As a rule, bright fixes on open apertures lose image quality. What is the advantage? The viewfinder is lighter, but this is a matter of habit. Let it be darker, but for the picture to ring. Personally, I don’t really like it when only eyelashes are in sharpness. You can artistically understand, but it's not mine. That's when the sharpness falls behind my ears I like. Of course this is primitive, but I will write to you, as I often do. Let's say everything is sharp. In Photoshop, using the blur filter, I make the image blurry. Then the historical brush restores sharpness on the face and where necessary. I restore in different areas with a different percentage. To clearly do everything, you need to tinker. Of course, if you shoot hundreds of portraits, this is not real. So for isolated cases like mine this is acceptable. I have not chased high-aperture optics for a long time, I sold it with joy! I’m not shooting in the dark, the depth of field drops with a large aperture. If you really really need better to lift up iso or flash. Of course, many will not agree with me, but this is everyone’s business.
Vitaliy,
A sharp portrait and fast aperture get along well with each other. It has been discussed more than once that on covered fast apertures, they give a better picture than dark zooms at the same value.
There is no choice between flash and fast-fix. The flash is used where there is a lot of light. Its functionality is not equal to a powerful light bulb.
I don’t know why the portrait on the open aperture is associated with a blurry image. DOF you select in such a way as to separate the object from the background, achieve smooth transitions, and at the same time focus the sharpness on the object. In some cases, you need a portrait with a high depth of field and good contrast, in others, vice versa. This is not just a difference in tastes, but in fact a difference in situations and tasks.
About software sharpening - well, yes, I also know this method. And I can write at least five more. This, however, has nothing to do with the discussion. When I wrote to you about sharping, I wanted to explain one of the reasons for this difference in terms of sharpness of images from the D700 and D80. The D700 was set to maximum sharpening, while the D80 was set to zero. If D80 had maximum sharpening, you probably would have liked the picture better. And I liked it just like that, because lenses are valuable not only for sharpness.
Valentine.
“It has been discussed more than once that on covered fast apertures give a better picture than dark zooms at the same value.”
Fixes (as a rule) give a sharper picture than zooms, who does not know. True, there is also such a thing as image sculpting, which is different for each lens. I had a tamron 17 / 50-2,8 It sculpts in a peculiar way, maybe not bad, but when the face distorts the proportions in large proportions, 50mm was not enough for me. Nikon 18 / 70-3,5 Here 70 is a completely different matter. Taking longer focal lengths, it was like that - flattens. Of course there are different faces too. I understand that the main thing is emotion (sad, funny, etc.), but that's another thing. And with a normal face, volume should still be transmitted.
“There’s no choice between flash and fast shutter. The flash is also used where there is a lot of light. ”
Well, the highlight, what's the news. They advertise lenses, how fast it is, you can shoot in the dark. Here's the plan I wrote. But no flu at all.
“If the D80 had maximum sharping, you probably would have liked the picture more. And I liked it just like that, because lenses are valuable not only in sharpness ”
So it is not the lens that is valuable, it is the camera that can de-sharpen. Yes. I would have liked a sharper picture so that the details could be seen. In addition, when you look at these photos, you get the impression that they were shot with a weak lens. Different sharpness - like perspective, it emphasizes volume, and this hazy sharpness narrows the volume. And this is also a task to show the volume on the plane. There are, of course, flat images, in my opinion this is a minus here. By the way, it is necessary to indicate somewhere about sharping, otherwise who knows what kind of sharping there is.
50mm f / 1.4D AF Nikkor, will it automatically focus on the nikon d3300
It will not.
Friends, tell me, is it realistic to shoot on this lens with aperture 1.4? I have hard halos and soap
I'm filming. On the open soft, there is aberration. It is very important to achieve accurate focus in the frame. The slightest blunders - everything - the picture is spoiled. Try to take test shots in LiveView, you can use zoom and manual focus. After accurate focusing, decide for yourself a good picture from it or not. It suits me, some may not.
To everyone, everyone who has such a fifty dollar “D”, Made in Japan. 52 mm. I don’t know which one I have? MK I? Or MK II? How to find out? NOTHING is written on it! :-(
But, having bought a lens hood, Nikon HB-47, I was terribly upset, because she, ONLY on “G” :-( And on my ... Like a saddle on a cow ...
Please advise, plz, what kind of hood do you need? Not to offer rubber, it was, it breaks, I don't see, a lot of frames in idle ...
I will be grateful!
Need a hood that is screwed into the thread of the front filter by 52 mm. It is easier to find out the version by its name, which is written on the lens and / or serial number.
This, for example, is suitable for 52mm: http://ali.pub/2nxoh0
Metal, powder coating, corrugation inside. It’s convenient to immediately order with a 58mm cover, which will simply be worn outside the hood.
It will do, but it is quite long, if you use the lens on a cropped camera, then it's okay. And on full frame, there will most likely be a vignette from the hood.
There is also a short one: http://ali.pub/2nxq4i
They cost a penny, the diameter of the chassis, I have both.
Earlier, in addition to the portrait, I often had to shoot concerts in the hall of the Palace of Culture, Nikon on the crop - he helped me a lot when there was a lot of movement on the stage.
The shutter speed with it was 4 times shorter than with a fast aperture zoom of 17-50 / 2.8, respectively, and less than marriage due to shake and grease.
And he used it to shoot large groups, on the street, for example at a wedding.
There is not so much aperture as the best sharpness, on a covered 5,6, than with zooms.
I also put on it a hood from Helios-44 (price 30 kopecks) + a ring from an unnecessary filter.
So the lens protection appeared.
In the kit, there was no native hood, and they cost at space prices ...
Hello, tell me, who is 1.8 sharper than Nikon AF 50 1.4D or Nikon 50 / 1.8G? or the same? and how are they compared in focus speed?
Nikon 50 / 1.8G and sharper and faster. But the picture is simpler.
50 / 1.4D if you take it, it is only exclusively Japanese assembly. The Chinese lens has blue lens bleaching and under certain conditions, this can give a strange spot in the center of the frame noticeable on dark objects (read the discussion of this lens here on the film).
Better to take 50 / 1.8G.
Hello. I re-read everything, but I didn’t make a conclusion for myself. There is a fix of 50-1.8D, I do not like it at all, there was an engnuo and the picture seemed better. I want to sell it and take on the replacement of some of the other fifty dollars: 1.4D, 1.4G, 1.8G. Pull any of them at a price, you need speed and tenacity of focus, and indeed, to be really better. Honestly, well, I don’t see any fabulousness in the picture with 1.4D.
Take 1.4G - Arkady praised him.
DigitalRev TV’s Youtube has a review of scripts for Nikon, and they also praised 50 / 1.4g and Sigma 50 / 1.4 EX DG. Arkady also did a review on this Sigma, and he liked it too.
To myself - I had a 1.4d Chinese assembly. Sold and do not regret it.
“Not the originals,” but fifty copies. T9 ((
1,4D - soapy and noisy
1,4G - a bit slow and flimsy
1,8G - a bit dark and rustic
But at the same time, any "really better" than 1,8D.
There is only one way out - Tamron 45 / 1.8 VC - an excellent design, the glasses are the same as in Zeiss Batis (it was also designed by Tamron), the picture quality is also at the Zeiss level, it contains special types of glasses inside, fast autofocus, moisture and dust protection, a highly effective stabilizer , working from an open aperture, micro-contrast (the ability of the lens to transmit more gradations of nearby colors, or gradations in general, which is very important for black-and-white photography, and what lenses from Zeiss, Leica and Voigtlander are usually famous for), bokeh is very pleasant, there are chromatic aberrations on open but they are easy to clean, it can be found in China for $ 220 for a practical new copy. By the way, the well-known Ken Weller called him “the gold among lenses”. On the internet you can find a video comparing it with the vaunted Sigma 50 Art, where you can see how this Tamron bypasses it in terms of resolution in the corners on the open. The only thing is that it does not have a 1.4 aperture, but I repeat, 1,8 it is fully working, and not like Nikon 1.8D (also a good lens), but its really working aperture starts from 2,8. Its second relative disadvantage is that it has medium spatial sharpness, slightly lower than that of the Nikon 50 1.8D, but how often do you shoot long-range shots that need to be extremely sharp? If so, then the second exit gets tired - the Voigtlander 58 / 1.4 - a masterpiece lens in all respects, but twice as expensive even without autofocus, since it is 58mm and 1.4 aperture, in addition, it can shoot amazing portraits.
Hello. Tell me, I choose a lens for the D80. The choice between Nikon 50mm 1: 1,8D and Nikon 50mm 1: 1,4D AF, the price is the same, which is preferable for indoor shooting? At aperture 1,8 they will have the same photo?
Read exactly one post above yours.
1.4 is better than 1.8. Definitely. Recently I bought a 50 mm 1.4 D, it is definitely better than 1.8 D. It feels faster to focus, I bought a copy at all without front-back focus. Here and a lot of where they wrote that 1,4 on F1,8 has more chromatic aberrations - I did not notice. Again, on crop it will blur better, with portraits the working aperture is F1,4 - the soft effect is even pleasant. And photos of nature with F5,6 are sharp, with F7,1 excellent. And it is important that it does not give a green tint to the skin color. Again, 1,4 is sharp with F2,0 and 1,8 somewhere with F2,8
There is a comparison. You can use an automatic translator, but even so, everything is clear. https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm#index
I bought it the other day and so far there are thoughts of returning it back to the store. But you still have a couple of test sessions.
I have Nikon 5100. I want to buy a fifty dollars. Which advise that he would have a working auto focus
Nikon 50 / 1.8G
Thank you! And another question, but there is such a Nikon 50 / 1.4G
https://radojuva.com/2012/04/obzor-nikon-af-s-50mm-f-1-4-g/
I was disappointed with the lens design, I thought that the circles of light on a blurry background would be round, and they would be elongated in triangles at the edges of the frame, like here for example https://radojuva.com/wp-content/uploads/sg/50-1-4-fx/nikon-nikkor-50-mm-1-4-d-made-in-japan-sample-6.jpg, the background may seem tough, especially if there is a lot of it in the frame. Stars on open diaphragms are generally no points. And so convenient and not too expensive glass for many everyday tasks.
Good afternoon!
Tell me, is this lens suitable for the Nikon FA camera?
Will everything work correctly?
And in general, is it worth taking this fifty dollars for this camera, give pzhst advice)
In the bayonet mount should stand. It makes no sense to put an autofocus lens on a non-autofocus camera, IMHO.
I want to leave my amateur feedback on two fifty kopecks 50d and 1.8 50d, which I possessed and do not regret buying them a single gram. 1.4 50d was bought on ebay for 1.8ue in a new condition, later parted with it for 54ue. After 70 50d was bought for 1.4ue in a state of the store). Now about the main thing: any (of the two above) aperture fifty-kopeck piece should be an amateur / beginner. bokeh: in 92d, as one friend said: fleshy)), in 1.8d - noble bokeh. the differences are visible and the geometry and pattern of the fixes are noticeably better than the zooms, and especially this focal point is convenient for fullframe, like 1.4 for crop. Apertures: open in both working, but it is better to cover them up to 35, but for creative photos with beautiful bokeh, both are not bad when open. Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that the difference in the $ 2.0 that I paid for 20d more than added a better quality fix to my arsenal than was 1.4d. Now I bought 1.8 85g on the recommendation of Arkady - I like everything about it: open working, bokeh: just unreal and the picture is artistic, but the focal point for a full frame is purely portrait, so I can't sell my favorite fifty dollars yet)))
nor what kind of lens does * picture * art.
The richness of tonal transitions is a merit of the lenses, not just the sensor: and it greatly affects the texture and volume of objects in the frame. "Depth".
Exactly the same bokeh: choosing between fifty kopecks Konica or Helios - and some sharp and much more universal (at first glance) zoom, I will probably take one of the first two.
For some of my tasks - for example, a portrait - the first two add a lot to the final shot. Depth, as well as amazing bokeh - everything is with them.
all right. For example, the Zeiss optics transmits grayscale and shadow noticeably better than others, and the overall contrast is much higher. that is, very small changes in brightness and color will be visible. when shooting on other optics in the same conditions, all this merges into one color or one brightness. Cais differs in both the composition of glass and enlightenment.
Konica / Minolta are excellent glasses, but the flange distance does not allow them to be installed on a DSLR, so they should only be used on the UPC.
> when shooting with other optics in the same conditions, it all merges into one color or one brightness
A good example, to the point.
For BZK and Konik (AR) - I am glad to be able to use these lenses. Hexanon fifty dollars, in all their variations - magic glasses.
The film is a wonderful BW at the output, even if it takes some getting used to the carcasses (FS / FT-1), and JVI - in the film world, there were more comfortable ones. Digital (Fuji, Sony): the whole process is a pleasure. Both for the convenience of work and for the result.
I have all DSLR cameras, so from the manuals I use Tsais and Zuiko - they are not much worse than Minolta)) but Minolta Rockcor 50 1.4 surprised me with sharpness in the open. I shot on a DSLR without an adapter, just pressed it to the mount with my hand. Ken Rockwell praised this minolta too.
Konica AR is also a Dominoltian heritage :) I didn’t have to work with Minoltov’s glasses, if only for garlic. And Zuyki, who are OM - yes, no questions asked: 28 and 35, while it seems like “age” shiriks - work and the result (again) please.
the answer is a little off there, but otherwise it will not work - the branch is long.
meant zuiko old, manual, of course. I have 50 1.4 (5 version) and 28 2.0 - fifty dollars is ideal and quite sharp in the open, in principle, portraits can be shot like that. slightly tucked in - very sharp. HA are minimal. 28 2.0 is perhaps the sharpest and, moreover, the lightest shirik in general. but it has a curvature of the field, there's nothing you can do about it, so you have to think about what and how to shoot. but in the center, but in the full frame - well, just a very sharp glass.
Yes, manual. And all is well.
My 28 - he's 3.5. And the observations are slightly different: the sharpness in the center, and the field (on the crop) on the open one - is working for many subjects. Landscapes and houses at 5.6 - excellent, 8 - even more so. But the curvature of the field is not so clearly expressed, at 5.6 I don't remember it.
Anyway, now I feel an itch: 2.0 - I will probably look :)
Zuiko 28 2.0 has a greater curvature of the field than its darker counterparts, but noticeably greater sharpness, starting from the open one. in addition, it has a system of "floating lenses" that allows you to have excellent sharpness at any shooting distance, even at close range. on the open, spherical aberrations are noticeable, which, sobssno, and reduce sharpness, but if you shoot not in bright light, and not landscapes, but portraits in a confined space (at home or in a cafe where there is no place or light), street photo or video , then the picture will be pleasing to the eye. on covered it is VERY sharp, moreover, you can shoot at 5.6 what is usually removed on other glasses at 8.0 - the sharpness will be more than enough. Sobssno, it is quite sharp already at 4.0, at 5.6 only a little sharper, and this is almost the limit, at 8.0 the sharpness increases slightly, so it makes sense to clamp it so only for the sake of greater depth of field.
Thank you, very detailed and to the point: gives an idea of the pros and limitations. And inspiring: I know situations in which the frame will help to catch.
PS By the way, about a hundred square meters (100 f / 2.8) of Olympus - they write that the glass does not torment the owners of the HA on highly contrasting scenes. And besides, all the above-mentioned advantages of Olya - contrast, semitones - everything is in place.
Also, behold, it “bites” sometimes - I remember, I start thinking.
and more about zuyko 28 2.0
This is not the cheapest glass, and in Europe and the States it is often more expensive than in Russia, and there it is considered rare and is carefully searched for where to buy. Especially often video amateurs look for him. There are a lot of reviews, photos and opinions on him on the net, but it’s better not to look for all this on the Russian Internet. There is a version of NMC, with a higher quality enlightenment, but it makes no sense to look for it exactly - the difference in the picture is difficult to perceive visually, rather instrumental.
Just in case, I'll clarify about the curvature of the field - if you shoot an even long building, with the camera strictly in the center and the matrix parallel to the facade, then even at 8.0 the edges of the frame will be noticeably less sharp. Alas. I myself did not expect this when I bought the lens. (however, in the center, on a good camera and in good light, every smallest crack in the plaster or bricks will be visible) But it is ideal for them to shoot something standing in a small semicircle AROUND the photographer - sharpness in the center and at the edges will be already high by 4.0, and acceptable even at 2.8, whereas on lenses corrected in the plane of the field, it would be necessary to clamp the hole aperture strongly :)
> But it is ideal for them to shoot something standing in a small semicircle AROUND the photographer
Introduced. Again - very visual (and it helps).
I rarely shoot something long. And you can choose the “correct” object and shooting point, knowing about the disadvantage :)
For the price - I see, about a twofold (or more) difference from 2.8 / 3.5. When the vaccine against the well-known misfortune appears, I will take up the search, probably: I persuade myself not to spend money now - it will be rash.
and Zuiko 100 2.8 is a very unusual glass, both in the optical scheme and in the picture. yes even outwardly it is very small - almost like a fifty-ruble 1.4 :) darkish, of course, I tend to gravitate more and more to the LIGHT, but as a portrait photographer it is beautiful. you can safely shoot in the open - I tried it, but I don't have it myself, because there are already a lot of glasses, and you can't grasp the immensity :)
> because there are already a lot of glasses
Yes, I stop myself with the same: 80-135 - I have them.
Control / editing of HA - sometimes I get tired of this (lazy) and think about a manual that will “forgive” this laziness.
the branch became long and completely off topic, I hope Arkady doesn’t immediately take it all down :)
I bought my copy of Zuiko 28 2.0 (like 50 1.4) in St. Petersburg from a person who has been doing this for a long time. he has his own, quite well-known and easily found group in VKontakte, but I will not mention it here, so as not to be considered an advertisement. the prices are indicated there, the optics are exactly the same as in the photos presented there, the seller answers all questions in detail and shows / tells everything that interests the buyer. The two lenses I bought were, as they say, “the fly didn’t sit”, it’s easy to look at them and it’s nice, so beautiful technology. and how the focuser ring turns - it's just a kinesthetic orgasm :) I specially give this optics to all my friends - just twist the focus. lenses, judging by the codes on it, the beginning of the 80s, but still in perfect condition. Yoshihisa Maitani is a genius!
Yes, thanks for the conversation, Alexey. They went completely aside from the hero of the review, but - it was fascinating :) Oly's legacy - you can talk about that for a long time.
(Thank you for a hint about a purchase option. I think I understand who I'm talking about.)
Of course, framing and the ability to catch the moment - everything that is called the photographer's gaze - are equally important conditions for a “live”, eye-catching picture.
partly, nevertheless, it does - thanks to uncorrected spherical aberrations, for example.
I have the feeling that photography in most comes down to turning craft. But what about art education and education?
and here the point is, WHY someone photographs. for me, as an engineer, the concept of artistry is quite alien. but just to make a technically (almost) perfect shot of a beautiful girl - I like both she and me :)
no archive with photos