f/1.4 versus f/1.8: How much more light actually gets through?

Hafcc · May 8, 2009

vincentnyc, I say keep the Tamron and broaden your horizons by using a prime lens. I use primes a lot and I love them because I feel that a fixed focal length lens forces one to be more creative and to struggle more to get 'the' shot. For a working professional that needs a lot of flexibility a zoom might come in handy but I am not going to debate this right now.

For what is worth, the bokeh on those shots is not very pleasant, especially in the tombstone shot where the rendering of those leaves is pretty crappy.

About the 85mm, don't worry about the focus speed, I can honestly say it is very fast because I used this on a D80 and on a D300 as well. On the D300 it was even faster, so it will probably be just as good on your D700.

To me VR at 105mm is pretty useless, it all goes down to personal preferences. I like my lenses to be as fast as possible because VR in low light is good only for stationary objects, so it is useless for me because what I am really after is a higher shutter speed. At around 105mm if you want a faster lens you might want to have a look at the 105mm f/2 DC or 135mm f/2 DC lenses, but since you stated that an 85mm f/1.4 is too expensive for you than these primes might not suit you.

--
http://haf.cc

vincentnyc · May 8, 2009

Hafcc said:
vincentnyc, I say keep the Tamron and broaden your horizons by using
a prime lens. I use primes a lot and I love them because I feel that
a fixed focal length lens forces one to be more creative and to
struggle more to get 'the' shot. For a working professional that
needs a lot of flexibility a zoom might come in handy but I am not
going to debate this right now.

For what is worth, the bokeh on those shots is not very pleasant,
especially in the tombstone shot where the rendering of those leaves
is pretty crappy.

About the 85mm, don't worry about the focus speed, I can honestly say
it is very fast because I used this on a D80 and on a D300 as well.
On the D300 it was even faster, so it will probably be just as good
on your D700.

To me VR at 105mm is pretty useless, it all goes down to personal
preferences. I like my lenses to be as fast as possible because VR in
low light is good only for stationary objects, so it is useless for
me because what I am really after is a higher shutter speed. At
around 105mm if you want a faster lens you might want to have a look
at the 105mm f/2 DC or 135mm f/2 DC lenses, but since you stated that
an 85mm f/1.4 is too expensive for you than these primes might not
suit you.

--
http://haf.cc

--

hafcc: thx for your comment. you wrote:

"...For what is worth, the bokeh on those shots is not very pleasant, especially in the tombstone shot where the rendering of those leaves is pretty crappy..."

may i ask if you'd mind describing a bit more on what good bokeh on the rendering of those leaves (next to the tombstones) ought to look like? that way, it would help educate those of us who do not know.

thx.

MylesDavid · May 9, 2009

That is a lot of thinking about a lens. You really can't go wrong with the 50mm 1.8D for a little over $100. Try it out and see what you think.

David

ericfordh · May 9, 2009

Well... in practical terms, let's look at what you get for that stop. What you usually want is a low ISO and a fast shutter speed. So, let's say you have a 1.8 and 1.4 lens, and you want to shoot in the dark. You're at a high ISO, like 3200.

If the shutter speed you need for a proper exposure with the 1.8 is 1/30, the 1.4 lens can get you 1/50. Or if the 1.8 gives you 1/60, the 1.4 gives you 1/100. That can be a decisive difference between a blurry or crisp photo, especially with a 50 or 85mm lens.

Then again, you may not need that full 1.4 aperture very often. I don't. It's nice to have, but not worth the extra $ for everyone. Based on what you've said, the 1.8 is probably sufficient for you.

vincentnyc said:
Hello!

I read that going from f/2.8 to f/1.8, one gets "more than double the
amount of light going through the lens". Wow. Even after so many
years of being a photo enthusiast, I didn't quite know that! Is that
actually true?

I'm now asking the good folks here: how much more light is it going
from f/1.8 to f/1.4?

This is all in context to thinking about getting either an f/1.8 or
f/1.4 lens, considering the fact that my current fastest lens is a
constant f/2.8 28-75 BIM Tamron. My option would be the 50mm f/1.8
Nikon at $135, or the 50mm f/1.4G at $490. FOUR times the cost.

I'm a zoom lover. I find primes to be very limiting. Yet, after
having read that going from f/2.8 to f/1.8 is more than double the
amount of light, I'm thinking...wow, even with my D700, that is a
substantial difference.

Well, maybe for $130 (for the f/1.8 Nikon), it's "fun to have/would
like to have around", even if i don't use it much. But for $490,
I'm beginning to question whether or not it is a wise use of funds.
Hence, the related question about how much extra light does the f/1.4
let through, and whether or not f/1.8 is really "double the amount of
light versus f/2.8".

Thx!

alijan · May 9, 2009

marin said:
Get the 1.8, it's excellent.

I used to have the 1.8 and now have the 1.4, and I'm actually a bit
disappointed by the lens. I only use 1.4 as a last resort, and
usually shoot it at 1.8 anyway to get some kind of image quality.

I'm in the same camp as you. Much prefer my f1.8

JEGG · May 9, 2009

I'm wondering if the OP knows about what sorts of depth of field he can expect at these large apertures.

Austin Li · May 9, 2009

Unfortunately, photography is an expensive hobby. I think we frequently see the sincere advice of "buy the best you can afford". There is definitely a reason behind a higher price tag. If I were you, I would keep saving a little longer and purchase the best. Actually, life is not that complicated.
--
Austin

Photography is one of the ways to get myself relaxed from occupation stress.

BruceEvans · May 10, 2009

I think it's more a matter that the OP is worrying about the wrong things. The 50mm f1.4 and 1.8 are not the same lens. Their differences go well beyond an f-number. Just holding the two show the better and more solid feel of the f1.4. Is that factor worth almost $300? It depends on the user. I have the 1.4 but at the same time, an excellent lens for barely above a hundred bucks factors in. The OP should have one of them in his bag.

Bruce

vincentnyc · May 10, 2009

I went to buy the 105 2.8G VR this afternoon. My thinking being that it is more likely that i'd use/carry the 105 2.8G than the far heavier 70-200.

Considering the weight and lack of VR of the Sigma 70-200 HSM f/2.8, I thought that the "right" order of purchase for me is:

1. 105 2.8G VR Nikon
2. 70-200 2.8 HSM Sigma

3. 50 1.8 or 1.4G Nikon (just to have around due to its/their sheer low light capability)

I just think that i may not use the heavy 70-200 sufficiently to justify going from $800 to $2000 for the Nikon, despite my total desire and love of VR. In particular, since I personally value fast focusing a great deal, I thought that going for the Sigma over the Tamron makes total sense, but going from Sigma to Nikon may not, due primarily to the cost. Oh well.

Thanks again.

1984Landcruiser · May 10, 2009

For the 50mm Nikkors, there isn't much difference other than build quality (at least in regard to the 1.4D). I have seen some testing that indicates the 50 f1.8 is sharper at f1.8 than the 50 f1.4 stopped down to f1.8.

For the 85mm Nikkors, the only real difference between the 1.4 and 1.8 is the bokeh. The 1.8 is ok, but the 1.4 is legendary.

I bought the 50 f1.8 and have been quite pleased with it. I figgure that I can drop/lose/damage this lens and replace it up to 3 times before I'd reach the cost of the 1.4.

As to the 85 mm lens, I bought the 1.4 version and have come to love that lens. It shines from f1.4-f4 for portrait use, and is great for indoor sports at f1.4.

So there you have my reasoning. If you'd like more scientific analysis, check out Thom Hogan's or Bjorn's websites.

David - an Atlanta Nikonian

Search

f/1.4 versus f/1.8: How much more light actually gets through?

Hafcc

Forum Enthusiast

vincentnyc

Senior Member

MylesDavid

Leading Member

ericfordh

Senior Member

alijan

Leading Member

JEGG

Senior Member

Austin Li

Leading Member

BruceEvans

Senior Member

vincentnyc

Senior Member

1984Landcruiser

Forum Enthusiast

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts