Which 50 do you like on FX and why?

I'm contemplating a Nikon FX camera and 50mm prime lens.

It's got to have AF so, as I understand it, that leaves 4 lenses currently available.

Irrespective of price (shouldn't be much), which one do you prefer as a primary camera lens?

FWIW, this lens would be on camera about 90% of the time. I tried a friends 50/1.8D and it was very quick to focus. He said it was the fastest to auto focus of all of the other Nikon 50's.

I use the 50 f/1.8D, and can't talk myself into upgrading.  It does everything I need 50mm to do, and very well.

--
Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

i have the nikon G and the D - both 1.8

The new G is better across the whole frame to the edges, the old D needs to be stopped down to 2.8 for this while the G is sharp wide open.  The old D is sharper in the center, like super sharp

So the G should be the winner

But i think both are fine, i shot the G the other day with the kids at the park, nothing serious.  And all shots were good but not super sharp, i was actually surprised   I mean they were sharp but the D version in the center is super WOW sharp, its just soft on the edges.

I will say this, the new G version can be used no problem at 1.8 which is nice so i would probably opt for the new G version if i were you

As to the nikon 1.4 - the G is much cheaper, smaller, and i read the 1.4 is not sharp wide open

I have been extremely happy with the G. It's fast, quiet, tack sharp, nice bokeh. Does it get better than that? Marginally for much more money.

Seven 50mm prime lenses for Nikon F-mount

50/1.8G, because it's the *only* Nikon AF 50 that actually is usable at F/2 on a D800E.

(I've had all the others, all now sold)

-m

Sigma 1.4. Best 50mm I've owned in the autofocus era.  Can't comment on the Nikon 1.8 As I've never tried one.  Better than the 1.4G that I rented and worlds better than the Canon 1.4

--
rmarko

The only one?  

My 50 1.8D gets used a lot at f/1.8 and f/2.  Here it is wide-open, with crop.  I deem this usable:

.

Crop:

(Click original size and then +)

The G is probably a better lens overall even considering it's increased distortion over the D, but it's going too far to say nothing else is 'usable' at f/2, IMO.

.

.

--
Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

Well, there's the Sigma f/1.4 for the nicest bokeh and fast focussing...

And the Nikon f/1.4G for the sharpest borders/corners.

And the Nikon f/1.8G for best value.

--
Best Regards,
SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/119002

Another vote for the Nikon 50 1.8G. I've had the 50 1.4G which I sold in favor of the 1.8G which is actually better. It focuses much faster and is more resistant to flare than the 1.4G.

Don't let the low price fool you - even completely ignoring price, it would be the AF Nikon mount 50mm lens to get.

The only other 50 that I would rate higher is manual focus only.

My copy of the 50/1.8G behaves like you would expect a $200 lens to. Basically pretty meh.

My Tamron 28-75/2.8 tops it in all areas at 50 (other than being max 2.8) so I don't use mine anymore.

I use a 1.8 D version on my D700. Nice and light, sharp from f4 up.

Sorry man, I often agree with you, but this time, we'll have to agree to disagree and I'll stand by my statement. The 50/1.8 AFD wasn't good enough for my standards on a D700, much less a D800E. But my standards are tough. The 1.8G has a lot less veiling flare, and that's what makes the difference.

-m

I like the 50mm 1.8G. It has the sharpest corners of all the other 50mm lenses you are considering. I prefer it's bokeh to the Sigma too (just my preference). I would only get the 1.4G if the 1.4-1.7 range is critical for you.

I have the 1.8D, bought it when it was all I could afford a few years back.  Still a great lens and I use it a lot in my D600.

Agreed..................

--
Who looks outside,
dreams; who looks
inside, awakens
Carl Jung (1875-1961)

Leonardo da Vinci did not have any autofocus, and he managed to produce some stunning pictures. Go Zeiss 50mm f/2.0.

--
https://plus.google.com/100359293697977327696/photos

I'm in the same situation and have been searchin the internet for an answer.

Quick flickr search shows that the f1.4 Nikkors does remarkably better shallow-dof portraits which I like a lot. I'm concerned about the at-speed but I want shallow dof and that 1.4-look if there is such thing.

Can anyone post nice shallow-dof portraits taken with 1.8-lens?

I have a love/hate relationship with them all and find the 50 1.4g the best compromise between focus accuracy/size/weight/sharpness and bokeh. The sigma is better all around but substantially larger, both the af-d lenses focus faster but accuracy tolerances are too coarse for demanding high resolution sensors.

The new 1.8g is faster focusing and has marginally better flare resistance, but its bokeh is marginal. Also, 1.8 is not fast enough to differentiate it from the extremely capable 2.8 zooms in this FL length. So when I use this lens it is because I need the most accurate focus, and the most light gathering, thin DOF and pleasing bokeh in a compact package. There are no great lenses in the 50mm except the sigma, but it is just too large for a fast 50. I would not be surprised if the 50 is reenginered with gold ring, nano coating and in a 1.2 variant, but until then I will stick with the 1.4g when I need to shoot 1.4 and use the 24-70 when I don't. If you are not bothered by the size, consider the sigma. Then again, the 50 1.8g is a real gem and inexpensive - except for the harsh bokeh and the light gathering limitations it is a real bargain. I have the other two 1.8's in the modern 1.8 trio presently (and they are really good and inexpensive).

My 50g is by far my least used FL on FX, but when I use it I am always pleased with the output when the subject are fairly static and light is at a premium. I am a sucker for MTF resolution, and according to lenrentals tests on the 50g's, the 1.4 edges out the 1.8 in the center where the subject is more likely to reside for my shooting style. I you want a nikon, you are must balance your need for focus speed, size and flare resistance with less light gathering/ marginal bokeh but sharper corners (the 1.8g), and the 1.4g with almost a stop more light gathering, better bokeh, having to use the supplied hood to reduce flare, and noticeably slower (albeit accurate) focusing and the sharpest modern nikon 50 with good center (but not great corner sharpness). Both are compact and inexpensive. Pick your poison.

--
Chad Gladstone

I examined all the choices (before the 50/1.8G came out) and bought the Sigma 50/1.4, because it seemed to have the nicest bokeh.  I also have the 50/1.8D, and I love the size and weight, but the IQ seems just "OK" to me.  The Sigma is big and heavy, but I'm stuck with it, because I like the images so much.

Julie