I just picked up my 50/1.8G yesterday and had a brief chance to compare it to my 50/1.8D and 50/1.2AIS on my D700.
My findings seem to fall right in line with those from Photozone - Wide open the 1.8D and G are about the same for sharpness in center (perhaps the G is a tad better), but the G wins hands down at the edges, borders and far corners wide, especially for subjects at a fair distance (say 10 meters).
Also, the G has much better flare and ghosting characteristics than the D - it had very impressive performance when pointed directly at the sun. The sun stars at f/11 seemed to be nice.
The G is so quiet it was a bit disconcerting when I first started to use it - except for the change in the viewfinder image or AF confirmation beep it's nearly silent.
It did seem to be slower to focus than the D for long changes is AF distance, though for small focusing changes it seemed just as quick if not a tad quicker.
The G is on paper significantly heavier than the D (30 grams or so out of 155g for the D), but you certainly can't feel the difference mounted on the D700. The G actually FEELS lighter due to it's larger size/volume (i.e. it's less dense - perhaps it will float!).
I also compared these two with my 50/1.2 AIS at f/2, and in the center at least the old AIS still is the sharper lens (likely even sharper at f/1.2 . . .). As for edge, border, far corner sharpness I have not ran that test just yet. I suspect that the flare and ghosting resistance of the AIS lens will be significantly lower than the G.
That's interesting, thanks for posting.
How does it cope with specular highlights? I was never happy with the performance of my 1.8 AF-D with out of focus highlights present in the background, some kind of funky halo effect going on, but couldn't complain for the price!
John thanks for that.
They do look more circular when compared to the Old 1.8 D, especially if you look in the area of the tree over on the left! Slightly warmer too, which I find more pleasing.
Just watched an interesting comparison of these two over on u-tube (didn't want to post a link)
Kinda funny to see your test shots right out in front of Glazer's!
Have you noticed the focus speed? Beats the 50mm 1.4G hands down in my opinion. The 1.8 has replaced the 1.4 in my bag in a permanent slot.
James
Yes, I do a lot of my test shots outside of Glazers as I buy from their used case quite a bit - thus I test by shooting the new building across the street (it gets full sunshine when there is sun, it has lots of contrast, and it's tall enough for really wide angles on FX) and then go home and make sure everything in fine with the lens before returning to purchase (or not in many cases).
I've found about 1/2 of their used stuff is optically defective, but they also have some real gems at sometimes decent prices too (I got my 400/5.6 ED-IF AIS and 24-85AFS from them).
Anyways - I just now tested their focusing speeds going from infinity to about 1 meter, and really, to tell the truth maybe, just maybe the G is a tad slower, but it may just be that it's due to being able to hear the D focusing while the G is nearly silent, so that the D SOUNDS fast.
I would say the focusing speed difference is negligible on my D700. As to focus tracking and accuracy I can't comment. I have seen from the Photozone.de tests that the G has a lot more focus shift than the D, but I hope that the Nikon engineers have taken this into account in the AF calibration of the lens . . . .
I've got my own copy of 50/1.8 G the other week. I am very happy with it and definitely won a slot in my gear bag. IMHO it is faster in AF than 50/1.4 G and maybe I am biased (I owned the 1.4 and I didn't liked it at all) but I think 50/1.8 G it is better overall than 50/1.4 G, of course not going to 1.4... I was very surprised by the AF of 50/1.8 G. It is fast, it is very quiet and it is very precise. It's not a speed daemon but it's fast enough for my needs. Kudos to Nikon!
I want now a 20mm f2.8 AF-S G, a 28mm f2 AF-S G, a 50mm f1.2 AF-S G gold ring, a 200mm f4 AF-S G VRII...
For those who have one or are planning on getting one will you put a protective filter on it?
I never did on my 1.8D and the front element is still pristine after 10 years, but it's so recessed that it's hard for anything to get in there to scratch it.
I'm not a big "protective filter" fan but even if I were, I don't see much of a need on the 50 1.8. Some lenses have a very exposed front element. The 50G front element is recessed almost an inch into lens body. It seems pretty unlikely that you'd damage it.
jhinkey wrote:
For those who have one or are planning on getting one will you put a protective filter on it?
I never did on my 1.8D and the front element is still pristine after 10 years, but it's so recessed that it's hard for anything to get in there to scratch it.
John
I have a G and did get a filter. My impression is that the whole mechanism seems prone to catching dust. But I agree - the lens is so recessed that it will be difficult to scratch. Almost like the 60mm macro.
Jammy Straub wrote:
A 'protective filter' on a $200 lens seems a bit like full auto coverage on a $600 car.
But if you dig it, then you can do it.
Meh. I just had my $150 105mm/2.5 AIS cleaned and readjusted to Nikon specs for $170. Doesn't make sense to buy another used one on fleabay instead with g-d knows what issues.
Such is life. If I buy a fine piece of glass, I rather take good care of it.
that'll teach me to read the descriptions first 
