[Guest]

[quote name='MadManAce' timestamp='1306800439' post='8943']

This is my first time posting in this forum. For the most part, this is my favorite lens testing site because my own lens tests concur more often with PZ than with other sites. That being said, I wish the tests were also done at F/2.0. This would have made the comparison to the 50 F/1.4 more interesting, and from my personal experience, just 1/3 can sometimes make a huge difference. Other than that, keep up the good work!

[/quote]





I would like for PZ to consider testing fast lenses at 1/3 stop til 2.8 too. For example, not just 1.8 then 2.8, instead 1.8, 2, 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, 4, 5.6 and so on.

[IanCD]

[quote name='ben4345' timestamp='1306822281' post='8947']

I would like for PZ to consider testing fast lenses at 1/3 stop til 2.8 too. For example, not just 1.8 then 2.8, instead 1.8, 2, 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, 4, 5.6 and so on.

[/quote]

Sounds like a lot of work, for very little extra information... and there'd be fewer reviews as a result

Anyway, wouldn't 'reading between the lines' <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> cover most of the mid-points..?

[Guest]

[quote name='IanCD' timestamp='1306823420' post='8949']

Sounds like a lot of work, for very little extra information... and there'd be fewer reviews as a result

Anyway, wouldn't 'reading between the lines' <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> cover most of the mid-points..?

[/quote]





Just wishful thinking.

[mst]

[quote name='IanCD' timestamp='1306823420' post='8949']

Sounds like a lot of work, for very little extra information...

[/quote]



Yep ... that's exactly why it won't happen <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[MadManAce]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1306857748' post='8962']

Yep ... that's exactly why it won't happen <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[/quote]

I understand not doing 1.8, 2, 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, because that is a lot of work. However, it would be nice testing lenses with partial stops on the next full stop. For example, the 1.2, 1.8, and 3.5, would be tested at 1.4, 2.0, 4.0 and then do the rest business as usual. Anyways, thanks for working hard retesting the "old" stuff with the new D7000.

[Guest]

After reading through some forums, talking about this lens, and comparing it to the AF-D. It is really amusing that folks are griping about the lesser center performance a lot, based on PZ tests. Personally I doubt the resolution significant enough to really tell a difference to begin with. The borders are significantly better though, on the AF-G version And so is the bokeh.

AF-D vs AF-S differences

1.8 is only 39 in favor of the G version!

2.8 is only 16 in favor of the D version!

4 is only 110 in favor of the D version!

Can you tell the difference in real world shooting?

[mst]

[quote name='ben4345' timestamp='1307307118' post='9050']

Can you tell the difference in real world shooting?

[/quote]



No, I can't.



-- Markus

[oppitronic]

In Germany we say "Nur Versuch macht klug". That could be translated with "you never know until you try". So this morning it got me and I just ordered it.

Let's see how it fits me compared to my AF-S 35, AF-S 85 and AF-S 16-85. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[IanCD]

[quote name='deroppi' timestamp='1307604118' post='9084']

In Germany we say "Nur Versuch macht klug". That could be translated with "you never know until you try". So this morning it got me and I just ordered it.

Let's see how it fits me compared to my AF-S 35, AF-S 85 and AF-S 16-85. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

Almost 'snap' (16-85, 85/1.8D, 50/1.4G, 35/1.8DX)..! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

Still finding out how the 35 and 50 'fit' - love the 85 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[oppitronic]

This one on-line shop again amazed me with delivery speed and so I got my AF-S 50 already in my hands.

I did a quick and simple test to check focus and sharpness and it seems that I got a good piece (never had a problem with Nikkors so far).

The AF-S 50/1.8G feels a bit better in my hands than the AF-S 35/1.8.

It fits my D5000 nicely and makes up a nice couple - just like the AF-S 35.

Like Markus already stated in his review, the front lens is "hidden" deep inside and so there is almost no need for the hood. And yes, the focus ring does have a little play, which I don't care about too much as I wear glasses and my VF is small...

The AF seems just as fast as the AF of the 35mm lens. I did not measure it, but I noticed no difference.

I somehow knew that 50mm might be a weird length for a DX camera. It is a bit too long for some indoor shots, and a bit too short to be headshot lens. I guess I need to get used to it. At least for "social shots" it seems to be perfect, because it is sharp and suitable for low light. And you don't need to get so close to other people like with the 35 (to avoid big noses...) and still get enough on the picture when only a bar table lengths away.

Like Markus said, the bokeh seems smooth, with a bit cat eye shapes at 1.8, perfect rounds at 2.2 and slightly 7 cornered at 4.0.

But I like it already and will certainly keep it. I don't think I'll miss the AF-S 50/1.4 which I borrowed from a friend. 1.8 is "open" enough for me and given the price and weight I prefer the new one.

CAs seem well controlled, but my D5000 does a bit of correction anyway.

There is no distortion correction data available for the D5000 yet, but I guess Nikkon will post an update soon, just like they did for the 55-300VR. And if not, who cares, it is not really needed for that lens.



A few pics:



flute at 1.8





sharpness and CA at 1.8 (crop)





bokeh at 1.8, cat eye (crop)





bokeh at 2.2, round (crop)





bokeh at 4.0, cornered (crop)