Thank you for this report. I'd be interested in seeing more on the ghoasting performance of the D vs. G. especially at night with a bright light somewwhere. My 50 f/1.8 D is a much used lens, but that damb green ghost it can create has ruined a number of my images. To have something better in that regard at a reasonable price would be nice.
The one shot you do have towards the sun makes the G look quite impressive.
Paul.K wrote:
Can you talk a little about CA? It really plagued the 1.8D and 1.4D for me wide open.
I had a 50 1.4G that was terrible with CA wide open, and even stopped down. In fact, the CA did not disappear until about f/4! The new 1.8G has very few CA even wide open that it totally caught me by surprise. To say that I have found my "perfect night lens" is a huge understatement. For $220, I cannot believe how good this glass is. It's probably the aspherical element at work here.
I posted this in the Cafe... reposting here..............
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are SOOC/unaltered samples from both 50 AFS lenses. (Note that 1.4G was even stopped down to f/2 and the 1.8G was shot wide open) If you click on the images, it will take you to my flickr page when you can see the exif. You decide.
Really appreciate the response. Even though it's not a direct comparison, the second image no doubt would have lots of CA if it wasn't the 1.8G. Thanks for great samples!
After reading a couple of comments on protective filters, the one thing I'd like to point out is that the filter makes cleaning a lot easier, especially when you have a heavily recessed front element. And if you don't have the proper tools at hand, you're really not scared of cleaning it with the end of your shirt.
a specific excerpt: "Note that lenses with well recessed front elements seem to be more susceptible to ghosting possibly because of the greater distance between the filter and front element. "
i am in no way telling people to use/not use filters, but having more information about the subject may help people decide. hope this helps...
Today I did some direct side-by-side testing of my 50/1.8G and 50/1.2AIS.
At f/2 (or f/1.8) the 1.8G is definitely the better lens in just about all regards - except that it can't take an image at f/1.2 . . . .
Center sharpness at f/2 is just about equal on my D700 with the AIS perhaps just a tad sharper - perhaps a D3X would show more differences. But away from the center the G lens is significantly sharper (even at f/1.8 it's the same story) and has more contrast.
Vignetting is approximately the same in the far corners with the G lens being just a bit better.
Pointing straight into the sun? The G is definitely the better lens regarding contrast/flare and ghosting, though I like the sun star a bit better on the AIS lens (but it's a minor point).
All of this was done with a target approx. 15 meters away and all of my observations are relevant for landscape-type work or anything not close.
I have not rigorously tested their relative center sharpness at close-up distances relevant to portrait work (which is where I use my 50/1.2AIS at f/1.2 or f/2). However, I will say that I did use my 50/1.8G on vacation last week for some close-in stuff wide open and I was more than pleased with it's sharpness on my D700.
That's all for now - you really can't go wrong with the 50/1.8G unless you absolutely need a faster lens. The 50/1.2 AIS now has an equal for sharpness at f/2 where it did not before (at least with Nikkor lenses). See this for a comparison of center sharpness of various 50mm's:
jhinkey wrote:
Here's side-by-side shots into the sun showing the 50/1.8G (top) and 50/1.2AIS (bottom).
The 7 blades of the G makes a different shape sun star than the AIS with 9 blades.
John
Maybe I'm crazy, but I absolutely prefer the AI-S in this comparison. The sunstar in the G looks very strange, and I think I prefer large diffuse flaring from the AI-S compared to the G's smaller but more pronounced spots.
Still, for the price, that 1.8G looks like a keeper.
Nope - you are not crazy - I like the AIS sun star myself, just don't like the flare and ghosting. But, this is one of the few, if ever, time I actually point a 50mm directly at the sun on a clear blue day, so it's not that big of a deal to me.
The ghosting of the AIS has bothered me during some sunset shots, but I also had a filter on it which could have been the problem (though it was a B+W MRC clear which usually does not cause such things).
I bought this over the 1.4 G and I got a chance to play with it yesterday.
Focus speed isn't super fast but it's pretty good but unfortunately it is my first nikon lens that has required micro adjustment (not much mind you); I could see the focus error out of the box with the split image screen I have in my D700. Flare control is very good and though I haven't run tests sharpness appears very good.
By far the worst thing about this lens is the build quality, I don't care is nikon thinks £200 is cheap for a 50mm it's built like a cheap toy out of a Chinese factory - seriously it is that bad.
Mark, you must have never used the 50/1.8d then because that thing way worse for build quality. Heck, play around with an original 18-55 kit lens, or the 55-200 kit lens. Both are garbage build quality. This 50/1.8G is a lot like the 35/1.8. The plastics feel more solid, the focus ring is actually well dampened for an autofocus lens and makes manual focus somewhat possible. Overall, its a pretty good lens for $200.
Yes, it feels like a cheap toy, but it's not. Upon handling it for a couple of weeks now I can say that it is not fragile. It feels very cheap because of it's volume/weight. It really FEELS lighter than my 50/1.8D, but the scale certainly says otherwise.
Though certainly not in the same league as my 50/1.2AIS as far as durability, I'm confident that it will hold up just as well as my 50/1.8D has over the last 10 years. How long the AFS motors in these modern lenses will hold up will be anyone's guess . . .
Tommy_D wrote:
Mark, you must have never used the 50/1.8d then because that thing way worse for build quality. Heck, play around with an original 18-55 kit lens, or the 55-200 kit lens. Both are garbage build quality. This 50/1.8G is a lot like the 35/1.8. The plastics feel more solid, the focus ring is actually well dampened for an autofocus lens and makes manual focus somewhat possible. Overall, its a pretty good lens for $200.
I guess I have been spoiled, I used all AIS lenses until digital and my lenses since those have been nikon's 'pro' lenses in the AF-D lines. I didn't think the build got any more plastic than my 105mm f/2.8 macro AF-D but it certainly seems to!
