50mm 1.4D or 1.4G???

kai28

kai28

Suspended / Banned
Messages
23
Edit My Images
No
What should i buy for my D90, and whats the diffence between these two apart from the motor in 1.4G.

Thank you in advance guys!
 
The D version will have an aperture ring - useful if you ever want to use cheap macro tubes that don't have cpu contact - or if you ever shoot video, as the D90 doesn't do aperture control during recording.

The G version is probably a little better image quality though, and faster.
 
oops sorry for posting in wrong section guys!:p

will i not make wrong decision if i go for the d?
 
Not at all, both will deliver very similar results. The G version will be quieter, D lenses can be a little noisy when focusing. You'll save money with the D version. It's down to personal preference and priorities really.
 
The G offers better contrast and a flatter field, but have a look at the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which also comes highly recommended from a lot of users.
 
oh ic, but between the nikkor 1.4D & 1.4G with their little difference...is it still a good choice to puchase 1.4D as its cheaper and the quality also?
 
I prefer the build quality of the older D models over the plastic fantastic G models. You won't be disappointed by the D version if you choose it and the extra money in your pocket is a nice bonus.
 
Laudrup said:
I prefer the build quality of the older D models over the plastic fantastic G models. You won't be disappointed by the D version if you choose it and the extra money in your pocket is a nice bonus.
Click to expand...


The G series 50 is a fab lens... very well built.

The G series is optically better than the D series, and unless you need a real aperture ring... the G series is the better option. Unless that is... you're on a limited budget.. in which case, a used 1.4D would be a great choice. There's nothing wrong with the 1.4D.. it's just not quite as good as the G series. Either will be a great choice.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
The G series 50mm 1.4 is not plastic.

The G series is optically better than the D series, and unless you need a real aperture ring... the G series is the better option. Unless that is... you're on a limited budget.. in which case, a used 1.4D would be a great choice. There's nothing wrong with the 1.4D.. it's just not quite as good as the G series.
Click to expand...

Photozone:

The build quality of the lens is very decent thanks to an outer barrel made out of high quality plastics.
Click to expand...

I'd have stopped at decent. The G is a bit better, but for the money get a D and use the extra cash for filters or memory.
 
thanks, i just wanted to make sure im not making a bad choice picking 1.4D over G.:)

85mm is more better!:P
 
kai28 said:
thanks, i just wanted to make sure im not making a bad choice picking 1.4D over G.:)

85mm is more better!:P
Click to expand...

The G hunts far less then the D for focus in poor light but the D is faster to focus in good light. The G is better optically too
 
I had the old 1.8D, definitely the slowest lens I've ever owned. Even in good light. It was noisy as hell too. But, it was tack sharp. Recently owned the 1.8G and it was so much nicer to use, faster, quieter and I would say end result was sharper and had better contrast too. If the 1.8 versions are anything to go by, I'd choose the G 1.4 every time, unless I really needed to save some cash. But then I would just get the 50 1.8G and maybe save the rest towards an 85 1.8G or whatever.
 
Nope, I would get the 1.8G - is 1.4 really that important to you?

I'm currently eyeing up some 1.4 primes myself, but it's more of a want to have, than an actual need. 1.8 primes are often just as good optically from f/2 onward.
 
kai28 said:
thanks, i just wanted to make sure im not making a bad choice picking 1.4D over G.:)

85mm is more better!:P
Click to expand...

The 85mm D lens was pretty well built, it was one of my first ever lenses and was mainly metal.

It's a pity plastic seems to make up the bulk of so many modern lenses, and for some reason Nikon no longer give the option of a metal 50mm lens.

The only metal 50mm option is a "legacy" AI or AIS lens but I don't think the D90 supports metering on unchipped lenses. I think the only non-pro body to support this is the D7000.
 
oh thanks for the info about the 85mm :)

D or G.....not decided yet :P more opinions pls.:)
 
The difference between the 1.4 options is about £60 - the difference between the 1.4D and the 1.8G is another £60 [going by current amazon uk pricing], how important is that 1.4 to you? That's what you need to ask yourself. We can't really decide on that for you.
 
all i know is 1.4 give better bokeh and its a bit smaller compared to 1.8

as i cn see now there isnt much of difference between d and g when it comes to the picture quality.

although G is newer version and D is a classic one :)
 
Soda Farl said:
Just bear in mind how dreadfully slow the 1.4g is too focus.
Click to expand...

I would agree that it is not the quickest, but I would not say it was dreadfully slow, it is certainly accurate, mine always gets the focus spot on.

I do like the images from it, although if the OP was looking to save a few quid, there is not much wrong with the older 'D' version.
 
Having had an AF, an Afd and a couple Afs's, I'd say there isn't much to choose between any them. The g may be slightly slower to focus but I never noticed it as a huge issue. The others never stood out as being particularly quick either. Optically I couldn't tell the difference.
 
Didn't you find the D versions very noisy? My old 1.8D would wake the neighbours when whirring and snapping to focus! ... ok, slight exaggeration maybe, but it was loud.
 
Cagey75 said:
Didn't you find the D versions very noisy? My old 1.8D would wake the neighbours when whirring and snapping to focus! ... ok, slight exaggeration maybe, but it was loud.
Click to expand...

Definitely. I suppose you just get used to hypersonic motors and after a while anything that uses a screw drive sounds noisy and somehow a bit old fashioned.
 
I'd choose AFs over D any day of the week. My old 50mm f1.4 afd was sooo loud.

It was quite soft wide open also. It definately wasn't as sharp as my 1.8D which was not as sharp as my 1.8g....good ridence for me with the AFd models, silent focusing is a valuable asset :)
 
Laudrup said:
Photozone:



I'd have stopped at decent. The G is a bit better, but for the money get a D and use the extra cash for filters or memory.
Click to expand...

Yep.. I corrected my post after about 30 seconds :)


Seriously, either lens will be great. As an example, the 1.8D on paper is not as good as the 1.8G but I had to look very hard to actually see a difference. It's there... but if you're not looking for it, you'll never notice. It will be the same with the 1.4d and 1.4G.
 
Last edited:
From all accounts the 1.8G seems like a better lens all round unless you need the 1.4.
I picked it over the 1.4G and couldn't be happier with it. It's sharper than my old 1.8D and I would say as good as any of my £1000 pro glass.
 
Phil Young said:
I'd choose AFs over D any day of the week. My old 50mm f1.4 afd was sooo loud.
Click to expand...

I'd choose AF-D (or even plain, old AF) over AF-S personally (as AF-S usually also means its also G). The aperture ring of AF-Ds allows those lenses to be used on far more camera bodies, such as my Nikon film cameras from the 90s or earlier, and used with extension tubes that have no electronic contacts.

I also feel that having the focusing motor in the lens as the AF-S lenses do, means that you'll be looking to get that replaced at some point in the future, whereas the AF-Ds will just keep on chugging' as there's nothing to break down.

Regarding noise, the noise of these AF and AF-D lenses depends on the body on which they're mounted. After hearing them screech on my old Nikon F-801, I barely notice them on my D80. I don't really mind any of these noises, although I can see where such sounds could be problematic in certain situations.
 
pmac said:
From all accounts the 1.8G seems like a better lens all round unless you need the 1.4.I picked it over the 1.4G and couldn't be happier with it. It's sharper than my old 1.8D and I would say as good as any of my £1000 pro glass.
Click to expand...

Not on FX were the 1.4g performs better than the 1.8g
 
The 1.4G only preforms better in the corners no where else.
I would say 90% of people buy this lens to shoot wide open,so thats a mute point.
Contrast is better, Flare and CA are more controlled and AF is faster on the 1.8G.

Nikon have really out done them selfs with the newer 1.8G range, the 85 isn't far of the 1.4g either but half the cost,there 28 1.8 is also a great performer from all reports.
unless you need the 1.4 in most cases the 1.8 versions are just as good if not as good but cost a lot less.
 
They're also very clever in not having a 35mm 1.8 for FX - you have to go for the expensive 1.4, or look to the old 35mm f/2D or look to third party offerings. This is why I'm dying to try the new sigma 35 1.4 - going on reviews, it out performs the Nikon 1.4, but costs about £400 less - if you can find it available anywhere that is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top