Which Nikon prime lens should I get?

[fish4570]

Newer Nikkor 50/1.8? E Series? Older Nikkor 50/2? Something I do not know about? Helios 44-M made in F-mount?
Do not mention the 45/2.8; price WAY to high. Same for any V. Ultron or Zeiss F-mount; wow!
Leaning hardest toward FE/FM ...

[Attila]

any all are excellent no price how much their price tag.

Let us know in what focal length you are looking for.

I was amazed by Nikkor 50mm f1.8 and f2 both, f2 is cheap really.

[Excalibur]

Well I avoid Nikon because of the silly prices for the lenses...I've only a Nikkor 50mm f1.8, but if you have plenty of cash.............................................................

[Orio]

Any 50mm Nikkor is great.

[Andrew G.]

The original Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 Ai/Ai-S is quite possibly the best of Nikon's 50mm primes. It was the direct replacement for the f/2 and is noticeably better.

[fish4570]

The 50/f2 is going for beans and peanuts on ebay, the 50/1.8 for not much more ...

[patrickh]

Check out 85/2 or 55/2.8 (which is macro but does well at mid - distances).


patrickh

[Scheimpflug]

[Andrew G.]

[Esox lucius]

[vulko]

[Excalibur]

***I never have plenty of cash, but nevertheless I find most Nikkors price/value outperform a lot of options available***

Well I though fish4570 was a film guy and not a pro, so if you are only interested in sharpness and not shots wide open then there are plenty of very good alternative lenses a lot cheaper than Nikon e.g Canon fd....and is the Nikkor 50mm so much better compared to an Olympus 50mm, Hexanon 50mm, FD 50mm or even a Pentacon 50mm and so on, same argument for 35mm and 135mm range.
And it's worth remembering that Photoshop is your friend and an equalizer, for shots posted to be viewed on a computer screen.

[djmike]

I have 50/1.4 and it pleases me.
Yes, any Nikkor is great.

[Esox lucius]

[Nesster]

Dear Paul, this is my nikon history:

Had a EM around, with the E 50. Nice useful camera, nice pancake like lens.
Bought a FE.
Bought a Micro 55/3.5 Ai (or Ai'd) + non AI tube
Bought a 35/2 Ai
Bought a 24/2.8 pre-Ai, but that was Ai'd aftermarket
Just bought a 105/2.8 Ai

They are all excellent lenses and with some hunting can be had inexpensively.

I also have a non Ai T4 mount, an Ai TX mount, and an Adaptall-2 Ai mount, for the slew of lenses that go with them.

The E 50 is a good lens, the real Nikkors I'm sure are better, but at 50mm the differences are likely to be fairly minor. Except that I had one lying around, I probably would have gone with something more exotic and old...

The micro 55 was the first lens I used with the FE, and I used it for general photography. Most of the time those fast f/stops are decoration, I mean in daylight and with ASA400 film. For my style of shooting I'd be happy with just the 55.

But of course, I'm a mf addict. The 35/2 is excellent and much cheaper than a Pentax 35/2... the night time internal reflections may be a problem, but I've never experienced that with mine. It is physically large but it focuses close. The 24 I consider a special purpose lens, though I have spent a day out with just it. A bit too wide for daily use, but because I was freed from the Pentax pricing on these, I figured, why not. It has a David White Ai conversion.

[56 DIN]

100 lenses 200 opinions 300 choices.......low risk

regarding the prices of Nikon primes, i see that it went down a little bit in the last year, f.e. 50/2 is now a real bargain for € 30.- With the link in Vilhelms post, you can easy find out the differences between the lenses and also see, where you might buy a cheaper elder version, that has exactly he same optical formula, than the newer one. Be aware that it not always went up.
I would not exclude the E series.
Anyhow, Nikon prices are not so fashion driven like f.e.Triotars today, or Flektogons, so you don´t risk much to make up your own opinion.

[Nesster]

Yes, I would agree: just about any Nikkor is low risk, and often the old ones that are beat up externally are fine optically.


But Paul, you do know the FE/FM are compact and fairly light weight as these things go? You may not get the added heft relative to a Spotmatic - the FM is 590g and the SP1000 is 620g, a real spottie a bit heavier.
A Nikkormat FTN is 765g.

[exaklaus]

[fish4570]

I think thos weights are close enough. but I still might go for the Nikkormat. A friend has one that I will try to get hold of just to heft it, and see how my hands fit ...

[fish4570]

gentlemen, thank you all for your advice.

Vilhelm, thank you for the link.

[Excalibur]

***I only replied to fish's question, and given what the topic subject asked I think he is unlikely interested in Canons, Olys, Pentacon etc.***

Well other views can sometimes help, as I made a mistake when buying a better Nikon than my EM, so bought a N2000 body for peanuts and find many lenses in Nikon mount are double the price of a Minolta or Canon FD mount...erm so after paying a whopping £18 for Tamron adapter can at least use the N2000 with Tamron lenses.

[aoleg]

In my experience, Nikkor 50/2 has better bokeh than the 50/1.8 version. The earlier 1.8 versions are a bit sharper though (depending on the version you get; latest two were made of plastic, and are actually Series E lenses rebadged and multicoated).

[Scheimpflug]

[exaklaus]

[kawasakiguy37]

not sure why the 28/2.0 is getting bashed here, I personally think its an awesome lens, even wide open. Ive taken some pretty amazing shots with, it has a bit of distortion but nothing crazy considering its a 28.

Now the 20s and 24/2.0 on the other hand....not nearly as good