Reddit reviews Nikon AF FX NIKKOR 50mm F/1.4D DSLR Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras
We found 9 Reddit comments about Nikon AF FX NIKKOR 50mm F/1.4D DSLR Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
The AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4D DSLR Lens from Nikon is a very effective standard length lens compatible with both FX and DX format Nikon DSLRsLens construction: 7 elements in 6 groupsClosest focusing: 0.45m/1.5 ft.Accepts 52mm filters;Maximum Aperture f/ 1.4 ;Minimum Aperture f/ 16Includes 52mm lens cap, rear capLens not zoomableLens not zoomable
I'm personally a big proponent of the reversed 50mm. A macro lens is a better tool overall, but I don't really have a spare $900 for the part of my photography that's little more than hobby work. My father owns Nikon's 105mm f/2.8 Macro, and the results and magnification are nearly identical to my reversed 50mm, with the exception of the amount of light it lets in. However, because I always shoot macro with flash, this has been mostly irrelevant to me. I use:
Macro lenses are expensive ($800+), especially ones that give you 1:1 or better magnification. For $30-40, you can use a standard 50mm lens reversed (mounted backwards on the camera body) with the above-mentioned reversing ring, which just screws onto the front of the lens and allows you to flip it around and mount it backwards. This lens normally takes a wide world and make it narrow. But if you reverse the lens, it now takes something tiny and magnifies it, as described in the first part of Stephen Elliot's tutorial. I don't like putting lenses up against each other because of the following issues:
Multiple lenses allows for zooming and may allow focusing from more of a distance, but I haven't generally had problems with focusing closely:
Those shots aren't manipulated much - just added a little Fill Light when processing as RAW, and I might have bumped the vibrance/saturation a little. Mostly, these shots are right out of the camera. Once you get the hang of it, you can slap this setup together and get an awesome exposure in all of a few minutes. It isn't as nice as an AF macro lens, but it's a lot cheaper if you've already got a prime somewhere between 24mm and 50mm, and an external flash. You'll need the flash for macro anyway, as you'll be stopping down all you can for DOF.
Assuming you've already got the 50mm (which I'm assuming you will by following the above tutorial), this setup is pretty cheap. The reversing ring is around $30-40 new, and it'll net you better than 1:1 magnification, though you'll be shooting in manual mode. (You'd be doing this anyway, from that tutorial.) That means, not including the cost of the 50mm lens itself you're spending $30-40 for roughly the same magnification and quality as a branded $1,000 105mm f/2.8 Macro lens, which has nearly identical results as I mentioned previously. For a non-pro (or non-rich hobbyist), it's a no-brainer.
The down side to a reversed 50mm is you have to get REALLY freaking close to focus with a reversed 50mm. (~1-2 inches.) Also, autofocus and aperture control won't work, though again that's the same as Scott's tutorial. Manual aperture control will work by twisting the aperture ring that most of these lenses have, though some of the more recent ones (Nikon G lenses, for example) do not. However, the in-camera light meter may not work. The meter in most non-pro/prosumer Nikon bodies' won't function with manual lenses. This is intentional engineering by Nikon to get you to buy a better body, according to a Nikon tech. If a lens is removed from the body (i.e. separated via a reversing ring, extension tube or bellows), your camera body assumes it's a manual lens. I think they made extension tubes a while back with electronic connections, but I'm not sure. The D300/D300s/D700 (and other pro/prosumer bodies) can all meter with manual lenses, so this hasn't bothered me. I'm a Nikon shooter; I can't speak for Canon. YMMV.
Another potential con: using a reversing ring can result in a pretty huge loss of light. If your subject is moving or you're not using a tripod, you're going to need flash, ideally off-camera with a diffuser. I recommend Westcott's Micro Apollo. It's only about $30, folds up very small and flat, and the rip-stop nylon and metal internal frame will last longer than most of Lumiquest's vinyl offerings. The diffuser makes the light look very natural, as demonstrated in the above photos.
Also, a tip for focusing with reversed (and therefore very dim) lenses: I usually rotate the aperture ring to all the way open for positioning/focusing, then stop it all the way down for maximum (hah!) depth of field. This makes it possible to easily see the exact center point of focus, then quickly stop down and hit your shutter release while your subject is in focus. This is another reason the true macro lenses are superior to a reversed 50mm... but it's not worth the extra $950 (to me, anyway) to upgrade.
Absolutely. The key issue here for me is that the d7000 is the cheapest nikon with an in body focus motor. Honestly, the camera IMO is not what holds you back, but lenses.
I think it's well-known that a good rule of thumb is that crappy body + great lens > great body + shitty lens.
Kit lenses are getting better and better so ymmv, but if you have an in-body focus motor you can use nikon af-d lenses where as the d3300 cannot autofocus with af-d lenses.
One example to illustrate this is the nikon 50mm 1.4 af d at $334 on amazon vs the nikon 50mm 1.4 af s at $446. Make a couple of lens purchases and choose af-d over af-s and you'll recover any price premium you pay for an in body focus motor very quickly.
In general, you may be sacrificing a bit going with af-d vs af-s but for the budget oriented, I have preferred to take this route.
I would suggest the Nikkor 50mm AF-D f/1.4 lens over the 85mm. It's a full-frame lens so it crops to around 70mm on a DX-body, which is great for portrait photography. I've been using it for ages.
I also have the 35mm 1.8G and it's a beautiful lens and has great value! I definitely recommend getting it.
Just wondering what is everyone's opinion on my situation. I own a Nikon D3100. Should I spend $300 on a Nikon 50mm f/1.4d and run a rode shotgun mic on top with a stand-alone recorder? Or should I just save my money and upgrade to a T3i or a 60D and lens? And I know the D lense won't focus on a D3100, I just want it for the aperature control ring. Just a stupid question, but any help on here is appreciated.
That's great to hear, thanks. It's a shame that it's limited to DX sensors, what I like about primes is that you can keep using them without limitation once you upgrade to FF.
Does anyone know if there is a 35mm equivalent to this Nikkor 50mm?
Thanks for the reply. Could you please explain what you mean by "-- 35mm on the 5200/5100 is about the same frame size". I googled for 50mm lens and found http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LENO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1425994521&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+50+mm+full+frame+prime and http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1425994521&sr=8-4&keywords=nikon+50+mm+full+frame+prime . Did you mean one of these? (still confused what you meant by the 35mm being about the same frame size on 5200/5100)
PS: Will do for sure. Thanks for the encouragement.
Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 ~ $127
Hey Guys,
I used to be fairly into photography as a hobby during and little after college and have accumulated some gear. They're quite old now but some are still pretty good. However, I haven't had the time and they've been collecting dust for many years. Now I'm thinking of getting back into it and need some gear advice. I will have a new subject to shoot on the way in a few months. ;)
I've a Nikon D200,
Nikon 17-35 2.8D, Nikon 50mm 1.4D,
Nikon 60mm f/2.8D Micro,
Nikon 10-200mm VR II
as my lenses.
I'm contemplating selling all my lenses/gear (Amazon trade in value of $1200 USD for everything) for a Olympus OMD M5 along with a couple good lenses (Panasonic 25mm to start and Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 to follow) and . I know the new M4/3 setup will cost me a lot more than what I'll get in return for my trade in but, with a smaller/lighter kit, I think I will carry the camera more without being self conscious carrying around a huge camera to casual outings. Also, I don't think as a hobbyist I realize that I don't need the advantage the DSLR format provides. I wish to move in the direction of convenience and am willing to sacrifice a bit in quality need be.
To note, everything will be bought second hand/used from Amazon as I've amassed quite a bit of gift cards.
Another option is to buy a used Nikon D7100 body and keep the lens as I've a head start on things already but, I'm not so sure. Should I buy a D7100 and buy a small point and shoot?
I guess I would like some advice here as it is a big move/change for me and I don't want to have any regrets. Am I overlooking anything?
Thanks in advance!
EDIT: words.
I used my Nikon D7000 with my 50mm 1.4/f lens and my 15-200mm lens. To edit, I used Final Cut X. I love GoPros though. My friend brought a GoPro but he didn't bring the right charger so we didn't really get to use any of that footage.