Nikon Z 50mm F1.2 S and Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 S

How good is the 50mm F1.2 S compared to the F1.8 Version? I am seeing reviews that tells this lens is exceptionally good or outstanding. Reviewers are telling this lens is a unique combination of character and sharpness.

I am thinking of getting this lens and currently I do not have any 50mm primes. I have 24-70 F2.8 S, 85mm F1.8 S and 70-200 F2.8 so far all these lenses are excellent and equal/better than lenses from other mounts (I have used RF and FE mount lenses in the same range). However, 50mm is a focal length that I have less experience.

Well your gear list seems to show you have two 50mm primes and Canon gear. So not sure what your question is aimed to.... Greg

My experience is that the s lenses are pretty similar in quality. A little better here and there but uniformly good. The 50 1.2 is bigger, more expensive, and gets you one more stop than the excellent 1.8. If you really like the shallow depth of field. Sure get the 1.2. But if you are trying out the 50mm FL, get the 1.8. It’s just as good as that 85 you have, which is saying something.

biff56 said:

Well your gear list seems to show you have two 50mm primes and Canon gear. So not sure what your question is aimed to.... Greg

Click to expand...

The 50mm F1.8 from RF mount was purchased but never used. I was planning to try the 50mm focal length then but never actually got to use. I was considering Tokina or Sigma. But never got to use that FL.

Last year I sold all Canon and bought Nikon Z 7II and lenses. I have not updated the gear list here.

If you searchthis forum for the 50 f1.2 there are a few excellent posts

If you don't have much experience with shooting a 50 mm prime not sure if considering a 50mm f/1.2 is a good idea. See if you can rent a 50mm for a week or so and see if you firstly even like the focal length or not.

Or you can also look at metadata of the photos you shot with your 24-70 and see how many of them were close to 50mm. In the F-mount world, I did get a 50mm f/1.8G lens thinking it would be great to have a 'nifty-fifty' and ended up not using that lens a lot at all. In fact most of my photos were shot with the 24-120 lens and at the extremes 24-35 and 100-120 mm ranges.

AkshajN said:

How good is the 50mm F1.2 S compared to the F1.8 Version? I am seeing reviews that tells this lens is exceptionally good or outstanding. Reviewers are telling this lens is a unique combination of character and sharpness.

I am thinking of getting this lens and currently I do not have any 50mm primes. I have 24-70 F2.8 S, 85mm F1.8 S and 70-200 F2.8 so far all these lenses are excellent and equal/better than lenses from other mounts (I have used RF and FE mount lenses in the same range). However, 50mm is a focal length that I have less experience.

Click to expand...

Before committing to a 50/1.2, maybe worth taping your 24-70/2.8 at 50 mm for a few shoots and see how you like that focal length (?).

AkshajN said:

How good is the 50mm F1.2 S compared to the F1.8 Version? I am seeing reviews that tells this lens is exceptionally good or outstanding. Reviewers are telling this lens is a unique combination of character and sharpness.

I am thinking of getting this lens and currently I do not have any 50mm primes. I have 24-70 F2.8 S, 85mm F1.8 S and 70-200 F2.8 so far all these lenses are excellent and equal/better than lenses from other mounts (I have used RF and FE mount lenses in the same range). However, 50mm is a focal length that I have less experience.

Click to expand...

If you have the space to shoot in the 85mm 1.8 is the better lens.

I have the Z 85 1.8 and the 50 1.8 and the 35 1.8. Even at a 50mm at 1.4 the 85 1.8 will give better back ground blur if that is what you are going for due to the 85mm zoom range and give much better background compression.

I would never buy a 1.2 lens I just dont need it for anything. I want portraits to be in focus all the way not parts of a face out of focus due to the 1,2.

I would like the 135 f2 when that comes out and might even sell my Z 70-200 to get that for portraits unless its a beast of a heavy big lens.

I love using the 50mm f1.8 S. I probably wouldn't use the 1.2 even if it was idly sitting on my equipment shelf.

Some things to consider:

1. For portraits of multiple people, a faster aperture would simply result in one person being out of focus.

2. If you bought the 1.2, I think you'd also want the 1.8 as an option for when you prefer lighter weight and simply don't need the last few percent of image quality.

My understanding is the 1.2 lens is for someone who is already very familiar with the 1.8 lens, has a burning need for that last 1% of image quality, knows they will use it regularly, doesn't mind heavy gear, and has deep pockets. If that's you, enjoy it!

The comparison between the BIG HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE f/1.2 -vs- smaller and much cheaper f/1.8 is obvious and subtle -- the subtle part can only be seen when the lens is in your hands and you see the differences in your work -- superb lenses give images taken with them a look -- the Nikkor have that look - otherwise high-end pros would not be flocking to buy them.

Only you can judge based on your personal needs and budget whether or not you will value the added benefits an f/1.2 brings.

I happen to own both the 50 and 85 and both the Z 24-70/2.8 S and Z 70-200/2.8 S (also superlative lenses) - but the look one obtains from the f/1.2 (not only at apertures wider than f/2.8) is far superior.

Lots of reviews and comparisons all over the web on the details and profering advice/recommendations -- yet the decision is yours. As others have said go and try them, rent them / borrow them and process some images.

My advice right now -- buy a Z8 first and very expensive glass later. Or buy both if this is easy for you.

The 50/1.2S is an extremely nice lens. However, to consider it, I feel:

• You *must* truly appreciate the 50mm focal length (hence, the suggestion from one of the respondents to put your zoom at 50mm for a while and see)
• You are at a point where you understand that when you spend a lot of money on such lenses, the differences, while absolutely there and valid to many, lie in the subtle to subtle-moderate in the common apertures, and you have to value these.
• Your work would utilize the early apertures where this lens separates itself from the slower lenses, and that doesn't mean you only shoot wide open.

The 50/1.2S is a very large, somewhat heavy lens, and also expensive. Thus, it's not a casual purchase. If you're unsure, and can't rent/borrow/try locally, then the 50/1.8S might be the better starting point.

Both the 1.8S and 1.2S lenses are in my possession, and their stellar performance speaks for itself. My journey with these lenses began with the 1.8S, which I consider to be Nikkor's most impressive 50mm creation. Later, I enhanced my arsenal with the 1.2S lens.

When it comes to evaluating their optical quality, distinguishing a definitive victor is not easy - though the 1.2S might just slightly outshine the 1.8S. Its faster aperture emerges as a key distinguishing feature. Moreover, the autofocus capabilities with Z bodies make shooting at f1.2 not only feasible but enjoyable. Additionally, there's a certain indefinable 'magic' when capturing moments with f1.2, offering just that extra 1% compared to the f1.8. However, it's crucial to remember that the 1.2S's superiority comes hand in hand with increased size and weight, making it a factor to take into account.

At this point in time, my preference leans toward the 1.2S lens for studio and on-location portrait photography. However, when lightweight travel is the priority, I opt for the more compact 1.8S or the 58mm f1.4G lens.

Curious, have you shot the 85/1.2S yet? OMG......

AkshajN said:

How good is the 50mm F1.2 S compared to the F1.8 Version? I am seeing reviews that tells this lens is exceptionally good or outstanding. Reviewers are telling this lens is a unique combination of character and sharpness.

I am thinking of getting this lens and currently I do not have any 50mm primes. I have 24-70 F2.8 S, 85mm F1.8 S and 70-200 F2.8 so far all these lenses are excellent and equal/better than lenses from other mounts (I have used RF and FE mount lenses in the same range). However, 50mm is a focal length that I have less experience.

Click to expand...

If you want to compliment your 85 prime I’d get the 35 1.2, not the 50.

AkshajN said:

How good is the 50mm F1.2 S compared to the F1.8 Version? I am seeing reviews that tells this lens is exceptionally good or outstanding. Reviewers are telling this lens is a unique combination of character and sharpness.

I am thinking of getting this lens and currently I do not have any 50mm primes. I have 24-70 F2.8 S, 85mm F1.8 S and 70-200 F2.8 so far all these lenses are excellent and equal/better than lenses from other mounts (I have used RF and FE mount lenses in the same range). However, 50mm is a focal length that I have less experience.

Click to expand...

The f1.2 supposedly has better bokeh. I have the f1.8 and it's amazingly sharp. But the bokeh in busy areas like tree branches is definitely its weak point.