Any portrait photographer went from 58G to 50/1.2S?

It’s hard to find proper opinions of 50/1.2S from people/portrait/lifestyle shooters, anyone here? I’m especially interested on comparisons to 58/1.4G. I know the differences in sharpness etc, so more interested in overall user experience.

Would love to get 50/1.2S, but that would mean selling a bunch of lenses.

while the 50mm 1.2s must be a great lens, I'm not sure it justifies the price tag with the size and weight.

I orderet the 50mm 1.2S and then canceled it because I'm just happy with the 58 1.4G and it's rendering. I think it has a more organic look that I prefer for portraiture.

I also have a 100F for film that I paire with the 58mm and this is one more reason why I'm keeping it.

Now it depends on your own style of photography. do you consider shooting wide open all the time? if yes and like it's rendering then sure! but the 50mm 1.8s is still a great option if not...

When I rented the 50/1.2S a while ago, I tested it as a portrait lens in a flash-lit situation. It's a nice lens, but the biggest immediate difference between it and the 58G is its size and weight: it's huge and heavy! The 58G is pretty light and compact, so the difference was pretty stark.

Packing it for a location shoot meant using a bigger bag or leaving other lenses behind. I had it on a Peak tripod, so fatigue caused by holding it throughout the session wasn't a problem, but it could be if you're handholding it.

The AF is also noisy for a Z lens and slower than the other Z primes.

The rendering is also different from the 58G, so there are reasons to have both.

I am using the 50mm 1.8 S and am thoroughly loving it.

I have the 50/1.8S and while it’s pretty good, it still lacks that proper ”wide open” look and something special.

Film point is good tho. I don’t currently shoot film, but have been interested to dig up my old film body. Might make sense to keep one f mount lens.

Raymond Wave said:

I have the 50/1.8S and while it’s pretty good, it still lacks that proper ”wide open” look and something special.

Film point is good tho. I don’t currently shoot film, but have been interested to dig up my old film body. Might make sense to keep one f mount lens.

Click to expand...

I am also using it on a Z50, so my standards probably aren't as high.

I would love to see a comprehension between them.

from a good portrait / fine art photographer without heavy girl next door sexy over retouching.

Since people are discussing sharpness and the 50/1.8, I found that my copy of the 50/1.2S was slightly less sharp at distance at f/1.2 compared to f/1.8 on the 50/1.8, and was sharper at every other aperture compared to my 50/1.8 on a Z6. In the middle apertures, it was significantly sharper.

The 50/1.8 is very good, but the 1.2 is even better if you're thinking mainly about landscapes, and this difference would almost certainly be more apparent on the Z7.

From all the reviews that I can gather the 50mm 1.8 is a really great portrait lens for APS-C since its extremely sharp in the middle and since its a FF lens, I won't use the edges of the lens anyways. My experiences have been great.

Below are some examples.

1.2 on a budget

For portraits of people a 1.2 lens is not needed as you want your subject to be all in focus at 1.2 they not be.

1.8 or 2.8 for one persion of a head shot is all you need 2.8 works great and gives you the extra depth to get a good sharp in focus photo.

For two people and for one we shoot the most at F4 to get very sharp in focus photos all the time and for groups we shoot at 5.6 to get them all in focus better.

We shoot portraits for a living and i would never shot any at 1.2 or 1.4. And i would never shoot with a 50mm lens for portraits as that is the least used range we shoot at. If i had to use a prime lens it would be a 30mm to cover group photos then move in close as needed.

We shoot more wide group photos then head shots on every job then anything. Or single person photos of them sitting or standing full body.

I like using a F4 zoom much better as for head shots you do not have to be right on top of them and get much better backgroud compression. And using the zoom you can cut out background itmes on each side of them as it is like shooting in a tunnel vision blocking out each side behind your subject.

Then then for groups we shoot more far back when we can and get the better background compression.

The best lens i have found for this in over 20 years of shooting over 1000 family portrait sessions is the Tamron 35-150 lens. It covers both ends as needed and is super sharp as sharp as my Nikon Z new 70-200 2.8 i also have but the Tamron is more usible as we need the 35mm end a lot in tight places and the 150 end covers it all very good.

goactive said:

For portraits of people a 1.2 lens is not needed as you want your subject to be all in focus at 1.2 they not be.

....

Click to expand...

You're thinking different portraits, I shoot wide open all the time, but not always ofcourse.

These are with 50/1.8S at f1.8, would be nice to know how they'd look with 50/1.2S.

Hi,

I have got 50 1.2 S and also tried 58 1.4G. I'm shooting weddings and portraits most of the time. I'm using 80% of all shooting mainly 35mm 1.4G (Haruo Sato design and probably one of the best 35mm) and for the rest 24 1.4G and 85 1.4D. So if you are in fast primes lens camp and you would like to use 50mm lens then this 50 1.2 S is really a beast. Bokeh on 58 1.4G is a little bit different and the lens overall is softer but it looks like "small" 85 1.4D where is bokeh beautiful.

New 50 1.2S is sharper and more contrasty, bokeh is in the most situations also beautiful and overall felling is like medium format. Fast aperture at least for me is very important, especially for longer distances.

50 1.8 S is also a great lens, but it's impossible to reproduce the same DoF effect with all f1.8 lenses against 1.4/1.2 lenses. If you don't see that difference then probably you don't need it.

If I have to choose between these two lenses I would go for 50 1.2S because more versatility and 8mm difference can be significant.

Good luck with the decision.

Are you going for more background blur using a 70-200 more far back will give you better background blur then a 50 at 1.8.

I get that kind of background blur at F4 with a zoom.

Here is one from the new Z 70-200 at 2.8 for excample.

and then one from the Tamron 35-150 at F4

Then one at 85mm and f2 this is the older F mount 85mm 1.8 on the Z6 it would be much better for portraits then a 50 as well.

Zooms are much better for portraits.

Raymond Wave said:

goactive said:

For portraits of people a 1.2 lens is not needed as you want your subject to be all in focus at 1.2 they not be.

....

Click to expand...

You're thinking different portraits, I shoot wide open all the time, but not always ofcourse.

These are with 50/1.8S at f1.8, would be nice to know how they'd look with 50/1.2S.

Click to expand...

--
Started shooting digital back with the first 2MP cameras. Over 20 cameras later still going. I shoot family and people portraits, weddings, Sports and a little of everything.

I would like to say one more thing.

If we are comparing some DoF it must be against the lens with the same focal length. Of course, the "blur" Dof effect depends on many factors, but perspective is not the same. In some way, we can compare only some classes of lenses like 1.4. This is the reason why some specific kinds of portraits are done with fast 28/35/50 mm lenses.

DOF effect let's say the "amount of blurrnes" can be more distinct on a 200mm lens but it is looking like a safari. The distance will be significantly larger for a full-body shot in comparison to a 35/50/85mm lens.

In Nikon camp, there are some timeless gem-like 58mm 1.2 Noct, 28mm 1.4D, 85mm 1.4D, 35 1.4mm G, and others. These kinds of lenses have very specific "film-like" rendering, they are not super sharp across the entire picture and they have many laboratory imperfections, but the pictures are subjectively beautiful.

So I highly recommend you to try it first.

Good luck.

I already have 105/1.4E for the longer end, but like Londo said it’s a different game. I have the 85/1.8S too. 50mm is my favorite focal length as I get fair amount of surroundings in the frame and I don’t need to be too far away from model.

Zooms are not my thing.

Nice portraits!

I have not used the Nikon 50 1.2 s but I'm using the 58g 1.4 in the last months and can confirm the sentence of some other users. This lens have a special rendering - some kind of magic - optically speaking. Every type of subject is rendered in unique way. I have tried a lot of different lenses but I must say I am in love with this one. It is not directly comparable with other due to the special character it posseses. Add to this the practical compactness.



Faces - Nikon 58G 1.4 on Nikon Z7



Moonlight - Nikon 58G 1.4 on Nikon Z7