File :-(, x, )
thefamilyman
Got me some new glass today too,
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D
seems to be very very nice ^_^
>> Anonymous
>>49465
Pro:
fast, high optical quality, cheap (F1.8)
Con:
sucks on digital body (50mm * 1.5 = 75mm)
>> Anonymous
>>49464

I like the 1.8 though for some reason my d80 has trouble auto-metering with it sometimes.
>> Anonymous
50mm lenses are ones that should be in every photographer's kit. They give approximately the same field of view as human sight and you can get ones with aperatures larger than f/2 for less than $200. They're compact workhorse lenses; my Pentax ME has nothing but my 50mm f/1.7 mounted 95% of the time. Some might cite the fact that they don't zoom as a con. Really, a prime lens forces you to work with your subject and will limit your composition choices sometimes; it'll make you work with what the eyesight angle of view provides. No standing four blocks away for a candid shot: you have to get in there! The 50mm is the middle of the three-lens kit everyone should have (35mm and 85mm being the others). I'm still working on the last two.
>> thefamilyman
>>49464
i had the 50mm f/1.8D but i dropped my camera oneday and smashed the lens.
the f/1.8D is a fantastic lens, especially for the money.
so i got insurance to pay for my new lens ;)

>>49465
50mm (at least on film and full frame) is about what your eye sees. same focal length, hence its called a 'normal' lens

>>49467
i use this lens primarily on my film camera
>> Anonymous
>>49467

75mm is teh sex. If you want it to be a real 50, get a full frame digital. But real photographers don't bitch that its 75 and not 50. Why? Because its teh sex and candy.
>> thefamilyman
i also have an 85mm f/1.8D
its also very very sexy lens, perhaps one of the best i have.
>> Anonymous
>>49471
Tard.
>> ac
>>49469
>They give approximately the same field of view as human sight
should be
>They give approximately the same field of view as human sight on a full-frame digital or 35mm film camera
>> Anonymous
the 50mm 1.4D is a FANTASTIC lens, you'll get alot of people with the 1.8D trying to tell you it's better... it's not. The 1.8 had greater bang for the buck value sure... but as an owner of both, i have never regretted the extra sharpness, better build and aperture on the 1.4D

Although what i would really love is the 85mm 1.4D... but that thing is sooooo freaking expensive... fantastic for potraits though.

The 50mm is a nice low light lens... and can be used for portraits though arent great cause even though they're 75mm on digital the depth of field distortion is still that of a 50mm so the 75mm fools you into thinking you've got a great telephoto
>> Anonymous
Don't forget that prime lenses are engineered to work at one focal length, so distortion, vignetting and especially CA's are much easily targeted and fixed. Fixing them at one FP rather than a range like you'd see in a zoom lens is much easier from an optics point of view supposedly. The second lens you get for your SLR (if it didn't come with one) should be a 50mm prime - the price, speed and overall optical quality will have you using it a lot more than you might think at first.
>> Anonymous
>>49481
Yeah, I stand corrected. I'm used to film bodies, I forgot about the conversion rate.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Good on you, enjoy that fast prime. :) I've always wished that the build quality of my 50 f/1.8 was a little higher. It's the focusing ring that has always made me sigh a little. It's almost as if it's vestigial. Just doesn't focus as smoothly as any of my SMC glass, or the old MF AI Nikon glass I've used.

I'm looking forward to the Pentax 50 f/1.2 in my future!
>> ac
>>49553
I've got a Minolta 50mm f/1.4 for for my manual-focus system. Unfortunately, the MD Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 still costs in the low triple digits, so I can't really justify buying it since I use my EOS system 99.9% of the time.

Maybe one day I'll pop for the EF 50mm f/1.2...

(Or even the EF 50mm f/1.0L. Though it might be hard to shoot with that, since I have to assume that being anywhere near a lens like that would give me a constant erection)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>49562
Hah! Good luck! It's even more expensive than the Noctilux.
>> thefamilyman
lol i didn't really need a prime this fast. If anything i'm going to lose sharpness and contrast when wide open.
i always push my film to ISO1600, it makes it very flexible in under all lighting conditions.

>>49553
after i smashed my 50mm f/1.8D by accident, i decided to pull it apart to see how it ticks, and honestly, we dont give the build quality enough credit, its actually built very very well, much better than we think. It was so hard to pull apart, some parts i gave up on and used pliers haha. That lens wont be braking any time soon, unless you did what i did and dropped my *heavy* F5 lens first from nearly 2m.