Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

First Shots with Nikkor 50mm 1.8 AI (long nose)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:48 am    Post subject: First Shots with Nikkor 50mm 1.8 AI (long nose) Reply with quote

Weather was a little overcast.

f1.8:




f2.8:




f4:




f5.6:




f8:




All with minor level adjustments and light sharpening.


Last edited by Richard_D on Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:15 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

100% Crops unsharpened:

f8 (edge) :




f5.6 (nr center):




f1.8 (midway between centre and edge):



PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

very nice result Richard
but I would like to know the focal length to evaluate how good is this lens


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it's a 50mm


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard, if it's the 50mm - I have that lens. I used to have the AF version also. The AF was probably a little better (hrmpf Evil or Very Mad ), as it further improved on the control of geometrical distortion, which was, in the AF, virtually zero - I used to have the 60 Macro AF also, and by comparison it fainted - the 60 Macro had a very noticeable barrel distortion where the 50 1.8 AF had none - so I ended up keeping to use the 50 1.8 for my reproduction of paintings, in spite of fact I bought the macro lens precisely for that!
However the 50 1.8 AF had the worst plastic barrel I ever met in a lens. Even worser than the worst cheapest lenses around. So I sold it, and bought the AI version, which has a very nice metal barrel that feels completely different.
It is a very good lens, but unfortunately, I rarely use it even with Nikkor cameras, because I always end up preferring the 1.4/50 instead - except for reproductions.

Speaking of your images, the #5, with the wooden houses and the canal, is just a fantastic view. It makes me immediately dream of a story - a very scenic place. Would do great in a movie.

-


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes I found it in 'Through the window' thread it's the 50mm 1.8
the 1.8 flower is sharp where in focus
this 5.6 sample look little soft to me, of course overcast condition may play a important role


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
yes I found it in 'Through the window' thread it's the 50mm 1.8
the 1.8 flower is sharp where in focus
this 5.6 sample look little soft to me, of course overcast condition may play a important role


Yes it's the 50mm (must edit the first post Wink )

With the 5.6 I think it's probably too slow a shutter speed and too many coffees Wink - It seems acceptably sharp at 1.8, getting slowly slightly sharper up to f8 (not bright enough for anything smaller, but I suspect it will gradually decline until f22 when diffraction (at least on my sensor) softens it slightly.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Richard, if it's the 50mm - I have that lens. I used to have the AF version also. The AF was probably a little better (hrmpf Evil or Very Mad ), as it further improved on the control of geometrical distortion, which was, in the AF, virtually zero - I used to have the 60 Macro AF also, and by comparison it fainted - the 60 Macro had a very noticeable barrel distortion where the 50 1.8 AF had none - so I ended up keeping to use the 50 1.8 for my reproduction of paintings, in spite of fact I bought the macro lens precisely for that!
However the 50 1.8 AF had the worst plastic barrel I ever met in a lens. Even worser than the worst cheapest lenses around. So I sold it, and bought the AI version, which has a very nice metal barrel that feels completely different.
It is a very good lens, but unfortunately, I rarely use it even with Nikkor cameras, because I always end up preferring the 1.4/50 instead - except for reproductions.

Speaking of your images, the #5, with the wooden houses and the canal, is just a fantastic view. It makes me immediately dream of a story - a very scenic place. Would do great in a movie.

-


Orio - Yes I've handled the AF version and well what can I say, I don't care how good the optics are, it feels vile Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad . Both the E series 50/1.8 and the short nose 50 mm AIS reputedly have the best geometric control (as I understand it the AF's optics are based on those). I've got the E series, but it's flare resistance is very poor and the 'throw' isn't as nice as the AI.

Comparing the 50mm f2 AI, 50mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.4 AI's (well based on recent usage rather than a controlled test!) the f1.8 does seem to sit in the middle - the f2 has the nicest oof (and general 'roundness', the 1.4 the poorest (still okay), the 1.4 is the sharpest (although at f5.6-f8 the difference between them is negligable) the f2 the poorest. The f1.8 definitely has the least geometric distortion. I like them all Very Happy


Shot 5 is The Stour - the river splits in two just outside the town before rejoining the other side, this section running pretty much through the centre of the town. The best movie featuring Canterbury is Powell & Pressburger's 'A Canterbury Tale', although I can't remember whether this bit of the town is in it, and much of the film was shot in surrounding villages.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard_D wrote:
I like them all Very Happy


Me too, although I don't have all of them anymore, I used to have them all - I especially miss the E series 1.8/50, which was stolen from me in London together with my photo bag Evil or Very Mad
Anyway the owner of the shop where I used to go time ago (he's not there anymore) used to tell me that "there is no Nikon 50mm lens that is less than excellent" and he was right. Whatever one you choose, you always get a great lens.

-


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the short barrel 50/1.8 and I am always torn between the three I have (1.4, 2, and 1.Cool. I also have the AF 1.8 (at $60 it has to be the optical bargain of the century) - it may well be the sharpest of all the nikkors for all its crap construction. As Orio says - they are all excellent and these samples do nothing to dispel that theory.



patrickh


PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is a review and test of the AIS version.

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Nikkor%20/%20Nikon%20Lens%20Tests/46-nikon--nikkor-aps-c/218-nikkor-ai-s-50mm-f18-review--lab-test-report

I own the pre AI f2 and the AF f1.8 and both are capable of superb results. Just check out the resolution figures for this lens in the above test. Wow.

It is one of my favourite lens types. Although i have just received a 55mm f2.8 Nikkor micro in the AF version and am keen to see if that tops it as I understand that this lens is as good for distance as it is for close up work.

Orio is right about the AF versions build quality - very sub par for Nikon. But I bought the lens knowing it had this reputation. And as I got it for well under $100 it was cheap. Its performance makes up for it so I forgive it this foible and happily kept and still use the lens.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A better 5.6 shot and matching 100% crop:



Unsharpened 100% crop:


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah, i like this 100% crop Smile


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikkor 50/1.8 very sharp lens Wink

Richard_D Thank you for the samples


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterm1 wrote:

It is one of my favourite lens types. Although i have just received a 55mm f2.8 Nikkor micro in the AF version and am keen to see if that tops it as I understand that this lens is as good for distance as it is for close up work.


Is "AF" a typo for "AI" or "AiS"? This lens was replaced by a 60mm one when Nikon moved to AF.

The 55/2.8 is indeed great at distance as well as for close-up. Sample (links to other sizes)



PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I´m sure it´s not, as there was an AF-version of the 55mm Mirco which was built from 1986 to 1989.

By the way, your attached picture is fantastic. I love the light and the textures of the building.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very nice shots with a "pleasant character" and the last one is ever so nice a setting!

Orio wrote:
Richard, if it's the 50mm - I have that lens. I used to have the AF version also. The AF was probably a little better (hrmpf Evil or Very Mad ), as it further improved on the control of geometrical distortion...

According to the Malaysian site the geometrical distortion was the only little "flaw" the 2/50 AI had. The predecessor is said to be better.

Orio wrote:
However the 50 1.8 AF had the worst plastic barrel I ever met in a lens...


Have you ever used an EF 1.8/50 II. Wink
Very nice glass but the built of a plastic yoghurt cup. (It's called "plastic fantastic" and that's kind of true!)


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:

Have you ever used an EF 1.8/50 II. Wink
Very nice glass but the built of a plastic yoghurt cup. (It's called "plastic fantastic" and that's kind of true!)


Yes I have one. I have the same feeling as about the Nikkor: great lens in shitty barrel. I am not selling it only for work reason (I might need it for my work). But I never use it for my photography.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I loved Rupert Bear when I was very little


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patrickh wrote:
I loved Rupert Bear when I was very little


patrickh


We've not got bad literary connections in Canterbury - Christopher Marlowe was born here, Jane Austen and Ian Fleming lived in near by villages, Charles Dickens lived up the road and wrote about Canterbury. Karl Marx visited (and hated it), then there's Chaucer...


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard_D wrote:
... then there's Chaucer...


I was about to say! Don't forget good, old Geoffrey!
(For me as one who has a degree in English literature, this is an amazing area!)


PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Then, for prog rock fans, there's the Canterbury sound...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canterbury_sound


PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:22 am    Post subject: 50mm f/1.1 Reply with quote

Richard I believe you are missing a Nikkor 50mm from your collection and, to be truly complete, advise you to snap it up at once.

Click here to see on Ebay



PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BenediktW wrote:
I´m sure it´s not, as there was an AF-version of the 55mm Mirco which was built from 1986 to 1989.


On further examination yes, you are correct and I was wrong. Wasn't aware of the 55mm f/2.8 AF before.

I must say it looks pretty awful compared to the MF version Confused


PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:06 am    Post subject: Re: 50mm f/1.1 Reply with quote

ChrisLilley wrote:
Richard I believe you are missing a Nikkor 50mm from your collection and, to be truly complete, advise you to snap it up at once.

Click here to see on Ebay



Hah. Before I clicked on the link I knew it would be a fantastic price. But missing caps and hood? That must, at PhotoArsenal prices, knock at least 2grand off it.