Nikon 50mm f/1.4 D or AF-S?

Dman

Dman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,656
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
I'm looking to upgrade my 50 1.8 to a 1.4 to go alongside my Sigma 30 1.4. The question is, what's the difference between the D version and the newer AF-S version, other than the price?
 
Bokeh, focus noise and focus speed really (in favour of the AF-S) :thumbs:

Edit:
The AF-D is smaller and lighter, if that's important :shrug:
 
Not used the D but got my AFS for £279 from Jessops recently and love it!!!
 
surprisingly I don't find the af-s much faster to aquire focus than the af-d!
 
awp said:
surprisingly I don't find the af-s much faster to aquire focus than the af-d!
Click to expand...

This is what I was wondering, is it really worth the extra £60 for the speed difference? The D is much easier to pick up second hand than the AF-S as well so I may go down that route if there's not much in it between the two lenses.
 
Will the f1.8 be popping up in the for sale section? If so i'll be keeping my mouse hovered over refresh:lol:
 
V8burble said:
Bokeh, focus noise and focus speed really (in favour of the AF-S)
Click to expand...

A lot of people on DPReview commented that AF-D is actually faster to autofocus than AF-S (on pro bodies like D200/D300 and up).
 
I had a AF 50mm f/1.8D for a while and eventually decided to get a faster lens. I too had the same choice but it wasn't down to price because I got a voucher for £50 off after buying the D700. So it was the AF50mm/f1.4D or the AFS50mmf/1.4G.......

Well the AF is quicker focusing (I have the AFS but the AF version is quicker).
The AFS is quieter (allegedly)
The AFS is sharper.
The AFS works with the D40/D40x/D60
The AF has an aperture ring so works with older film cameras
 
dalex_257 said:
A lot of people on DPReview commented that AF-D is actually faster to autofocus than AF-S (on pro bodies like D200/D300 and up).
Click to expand...

Granted, there isn't much in it... not a huge element to move compared to a decent sized tele lens, and depends on the body of course. At least in Cowasaki's case it's quicker ;)
 
I loved my old AF-D, but makes sense to buy the newer one if you may use it on the D60. You'd have a larger potential market also when it came time to sell.
 
Cheers all, think I'll go for the second hand AF D when it comes to it, the 50 will only go on the D90 anyway as I use the D60 as a backup with a zoom on it.

Got a Tamron 28-75 to buy first though!
 
Dman said:
This is what I was wondering, is it really worth the extra £60 for the speed difference? The D is much easier to pick up second hand than the AF-S as well so I may go down that route if there's not much in it between the two lenses.
Click to expand...

for the speed difference probably not, but the newer version of the lens is better at finding focus in low light, and also better on continous af mode. CA and fringing are slightly better on the AF-S version

Hugh
 
I do think the af-s is a better lens all round - just not that much faster in aquiring focus. Worth the extra = yes for me.
 
cowasaki said:
The AFS is sharper.
Click to expand...

If you referring to the sharpness of the lens wide open, then I'd like to comment on that. It is by some reason (and partially some shoddily done tests like DPReview ones contributed to this) that there is an opinion that AFD version is not that sharp wide open. When I was getting my, I went through a few of them and discovered that there were a lot of sample variation. A few I bought and returned initially were slightly backfocusing. It was by tiny amount a few mm really but it resulted at the photo being slightly unsharp wide open and that "cured" itself with aperture stopping down. "Cured" because the backfocusing effects were just covered up by the increasing DOF. In the end I finally get a sample that was spot on and it is incredibly sharp through the frame. I did a few photos of my family members with that lens wide open and it was so sharp that you can see individual tiny facial hairs/bristles...

Now I am not saying that it is better or worse in sharpness than AFS but pointing out that it is an incredibly sharp lens in itself.
 
Dman said:
Hmmm, maybe I'll hang around and see if I can pick up a second hand AF-S then.
Click to expand...

I love my 50 1.4 af-s, certainly a lens that I will be keeping and not getting rid of. I have a feeling that it is not a lens that will come up for sale second hand in the way the 50 1.8 does this is due to the price and people who are looking at these know what the 50mm is like and that they want the improved low light performance
 
If you like your 30mm Sigma (I love my one) why not have a look at the Sigma 50mm? I have read tones of reviews and some people rate the Sigma way over the Nikkor yet others are the opposite. Bit hard to tell what to make of it all really.
 
Zilog said:
If you like your 30mm Sigma (I love my one) why not have a look at the Sigma 50mm? I have read tones of reviews and some people rate the Sigma way over the Nikkor yet others are the opposite. Bit hard to tell what to make of it all really.
Click to expand...

Costs more than the Nikon and at the moment I can't even afford that :D
 
I think the focus ring on the D moves when the lens focuses, so can get in the way if you are holding the lens....on the AF-S it doesnt move when focusing....I love the AF-S, wide open its fantastic in low light....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top