Reviews and Problems with Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
Showing 1-10 of 46
15 May 2014
Excerpt: Purchased for a D600 which already has the 70-200mm f4 lens.<br />Took pictures but when viewed on my large display for photo editing I noticed the primary subject was out of focus. Web search described corrections for AF using the "AF fine tuning". Did that and it seems to be fine. I'm a little surprised by this----apparently it's a combination of the lens and camera. Otherwise, it seems to work like all Nikon equipment.
Decent lens, but the 1.8G is just as good for far less money
11 December 2013
Summary: This is a decent lens if it's on sale. The only reason it's getting a mediocre rating is because at full price, I simply can't see it being that much better than the excellent Nikon 50mm f/1.8G. The 1.8G is a flat out bargain, and is the main reason many people might choose not to purchase the 1.4G. I own both, and spent some time testing both lenses, and in most instances the 1.8G is as good or better.
Excerpt: Only reason why I made this purchase was because I needed a 50mm for new Nikon camera. This lens is good with the exception that it hunts while focusing. The lens goes back and forth for fine focusing. If you are impatient, you may not consider this one. The 50mm D 1.4 and 35mm 1.8 are so much better. The quality of photos are the very similar with the 50mm 1.4D being slightly sharper.
Kayla Selans "Photographer who loves to shop :)", Amazon
22 July 2013
Summary: I am a professional photographer (full time for three years) and in those three years I have used this lens primarily. It works for many needs. It can be your best friend - it definitely was mine. But it has terrible chromatic aberration that I just can't deal with any longer. Sometimes it's correctable in post processing, but most often it's not. (At least for me! It's tough. I use LR. Any suggestions?
Excerpt: I use manual depth of field 50% of the time. I would expect a fixed focus lens to have precise markings for distance/aperture. It is possible to use it if one insists, but it is implemented as an afterthought. If you are like me, I would keep old, manual aperture lenses for this purpose. Optically lens is very good.
Pros: Consistent Output, Durable, Easily Interchangeable, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight, Rugged, Strong Construction
Excerpt: Not a bad lens. It's fairly fast and sharp, but the images do not garner a "wow" from me because the focal length and viewpoint is what the eye sees. This standard lens is just that: standard. <br /><br />I am leaving my zoom days of 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 to shooting with all primes. I will still keep my 50/1.4, but only to fill a need between my 24mm and 35mm all the way to the 85mm.
Pros: Consistent Output, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight
Excerpt: The quality of the photos is good. However, this lens is strictly for portrait style photos. There is extremely minimal zoom capabilities, meaning that you need to stand quite a distance back from the subject. We use our camera for photos in our restaurants...food and beverage pictures as well as rooms space and guests during entertainment hours.
Pros: Consistent Output, Crystal Clear Image, Easily Interchangeable, Strong Construction
Excerpt: I shoot roller derby bouts and most often the venues are not sufficiently lit. I was using a 50mm 1.8 and an 85mm 1.4. This replaces the 1.8 model and it does a good job, but, quality-wise, it just doesn't feel like the 85mm.