Tracking AF Performance of F1.8S VS F1.4 35/50mm?

[CBR1100XX]

Kind of a niche question but it looks like I'll be moving more towards the Z system for the future and a lot of my work is at higher ISOs so the extra 2/3 of a stop would help. Just coming from shooting F mount for about 20 years the F1.4s there often wouldn't be as good for action work so I wanted to double check.

I'll be taking photos of everything from concerts, to circus aerials and acrobatics, to stage performances.

 

[ghostfox_1]

I'm 99% sure this will depend on the body more than the lens at this point.

 

[skyrunr]

I'd expect S primes and f2.8S zooms to be slightly better for sports than the others. Difference might be more noticeable with heads-on shots rather than more common side-shots.

The question would be "Does more light help ML focusing more than the RF feature of the S lenses?" (Rear Focus, less moving glass, lighter group movement,) I think it just might. NOTE: The 50mm does not have Multi-AF (multiple moving groups.)

Loading…

imaging.nikon.com

 

[jmccas]

Kind of a niche question but it looks like I'll be moving more towards the Z system for the future and a lot of my work is at higher ISOs so the extra 2/3 of a stop would help. Just coming from shooting F mount for about 20 years the F1.4s there often wouldn't be as good for action work so I wanted to double check.

I'll be taking photos of everything from concerts, to circus aerials and acrobatics, to stage performances.

My opinion, yes the 1.8 primes are faster than the 1.4. I own the 50/1.8 and the 35/1.4 and the 1.8 is very fast at acquiring focus. The 1.4 is no dog but in my mind it doesn’t seem as fast and maybe 10% slower. I haven’t shot them side by side but I have always been a little shocked how quick the 1.8 acquires focus - it seems so aggressive.