 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3
|
|
|
|
crosstrainer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $80.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap, sharp, very light, forgiving and fun
|
|
Cons:
|
If you're not used to DOF look elsewhere
|
|
|
Purchasing this lens was a no-brainer.
It's cheap, fast, light and easy to use.
I actually got this because of the reviews posted here, and the 3-odd weeks that i've had these have proven me right. Was lucky to find a specimen for sale cheap. No second thoughts about it and I snapped it up within minutes.
As a newbie photographer, this lens helps me learn the finer things about Depth of Field and aperture/shutter speed relationships. Aspiring photographers shouldn't hesitate to get one of these.
Highly recommended.
I'm starting to like prime lenses. hahaha
|
|
 Jan 8, 2006
|
|
BryanP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 162
|
|
Review Date: Dec 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $99.99
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack sharp. Very light. Cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality.
|
|
|
I like these lens because they are so sharp. At f/8, they produce some of the sharpest images I've taken and the background blur isn't that bad at all. Because of the crop factor, you can actually use these to take portraits, and they work quite well. They produce great shots when taking portraits when you stop down close to wide-open (not very sharp, which is good).
Yes, the build quality isn't all that great. It looks very cheap, and feels real cheap because of the plastic. It seems as if that if the lens would break into pieces if you dropped it. However, they're cheap. Even if you did break it, it wouldn't burn a hole into your pocket.
This is a good lens to have. It's fast for low-light shooting, and can take very sharp shots when you have a good amount of light to allow it. Good beginner lens to have as well since it will not destroy your budget, and allows experimenting.
I highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2005
|
|
deapee
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 14, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2143
|
|
Review Date: Nov 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, good for low-light, light-weight
|
|
Cons:
|
it feels kind of cheap (but heck it is cheap)
|
|
|
I think this lens is a must-have for any Nikon owner. The image quality is superb. For low-light, this lens is awesome.
It weighs nearly nothing and may be cheaply built, but it's cheap, so you won't have to worry about breaking it or something. The image quality that it delivers won't give you any hint of the price you paid for it...for that reason alone, you should get one.
It's great for portraits or headshots, but you will have to get close to frame your subject depending on the effect you want...and for that reason, for headshots with that killer low DOF, I'd say the 85 1.8 would be a better buy -- but if you're saving for the 85 1.8, you won't be mad at yourself for digging into your stash early and dropping a hundred bucks on this lens in the mean time to get you by.
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2005
|
|
Oblivious
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 336
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, contrasts, colours, sharpness even @ 1.8!
|
|
Cons:
|
For this price? You kidding me?
|
|
|
I can't believe the sharpness, contrasts and colours this lense produces. I can't say anything bad about this lense considering the small amount of money paid.
This should be in any Nikonians bag.
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2005
|
|
wepwawet
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Location: France
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack sharp, great image quality, small and light, fast opening, great depth-of-field control
|
|
Cons:
|
AF rather slow and noisy, occasional central hotspot, bokeh is too sharp
|
|
|
A must-have lens. It is small and light, so you can always carry it around for low-light conditions, where the f/1.8 really helps. Sharpness is unbelievable even wide open, contrast is very good, and distortion barely noticeable. Some people even find it too sharp; it does tend to generate a rather unpleasantly sharp bokeh (matter of taste I guess) and may excite moire artifacts on the D70 (I thought these were a legend until I took a snapshot of a rippling water surface with this prime ;-)). The depth-of-field control that comes with the fast aperture is just great for creative photography and portrait work. The 75mm equivalent on a DSLR is not awkward IMHO; this prime is actually quite versatile once you get used to it. I shot nice landscapes with it as well. Ah, and it also gives great results for infrared photography (you can nearly nearly shoot hand-held !).
Conclusion: buy one. For the price you can't go wrong. If you're new to primes, you'll learn a lot about photography from using it, I did!
|
|
|
Jul 4, 2005
|
|
baselin_e
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 100
|
|
Review Date: May 5, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $140.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I think for the price, this lens should be a part of everyones gear. I've only had the lens for a day, and I'm already starting to think it'll be one of my most used lenses. It's sharp, and great in low light.
|
|
Cons:
|
I'll admit the lens can feel and look a little cheap. But, hey... it IS a cheap lens. But the pictures DON'T look cheap. That's what matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 5, 2005
|
|
lowlitedigital
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 144
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
great pics great price
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
this is agreat lens for the money no complaints here
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2005
|
|
mr poo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 133
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $94.99
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
great af overall, small and light, great quality, great price
|
|
Cons:
|
not the best looking lens
|
|
|
this is the lens to use for walk around photography. very light, makes the camera feel weightless compared to my zoom lenses. the lens DOES NOT rotate while focusing as previously claimed. the ring does but not the actual lens. this has the quickest af of all my lenses. image quality is exceptional. the only gripe i have is the 1.8d model is made in thailand, and it looks like it. this is a simple lens, and it's built that way. but besides looks, it's very hard to fault this lens.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2005
|
|
60mm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $109.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, bright, compact, nice bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
Af is bad on everything from speed, noise and accuracy. Prone to flare indoors.
|
|
Obvously very fast in low light. Even in poorly lit restaurants, I can use it handheld and get georgous photos. Very sharp, and makes very personal feeling portraits. Bokeh is nice. Pictures tend to have a bright feel to them.
The AF is loud, much louder than you would guess even after reading peoples comments on how loud it is. It sounds like a remote control car driving in short bursts. The front element also rotates when focusing, which means I always have to adjust my hold on it when I focus. Plus, the AF is slow. 95% of the time it will go way out of focus, then into focus. Up to a second to focus is typical for this lens.  And to top it off, I dont always trust the focus, most of the time I usually get a few shots with it when Im indoors at restaurants, stores, etc. Havent got any in my home. It usually gets green or blue smeared lines that are about 20 degrees of horizontal tipping down to the lower right. Havent gotten a hood for it yet, so Im not sure what it would do for it. Interesting note though, the flare has actually tored out to be enjoyable in some of my shots!  I consider the flare to be a non-issue.
In the end though it is a lovely lens, I have it on my camera any time between dusk and dawn (alot) or indoors, and it saves me from using the flash all the time. Pictures are bright and have an indearing, very personal touch.
Here is a sample pic, where the AF did great for an unexpected shot where a friends kid literally jumped infront of me and I shot!
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/x60mm/kid.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">
1/60 2.2 400 50mm No post sharpening
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2005
|
|
r_j_r
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Nov 22, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, light. Good contrast. Affordable.
|
|
Cons:
|
magaenta flare in center of image on high key shots.
|
|
|
Great overall lens other than the odd color shift from internal flare. Happens sometimes, not all. I guess it depends on the subject. I noticed it on things that
are white or very light colored.
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2004
|
|
crabtreec
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Nov 21, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great value for the price, sharp wide open, reasonably fast autofocus.
|
|
Cons:
|
Small manual focusing ring, build quality - although quite good for it's price.
|
|
|
Although this lens might look a bit unassuming, the glass is capable of great results. While I don't use this lens a whole lot, due to my shooting style, it is responsible for a high ratio of my favorite and best photographs. At the price that you can find this lens, especially on the used market, you can't go wrong.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2004
|
|
tazo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 8252
|
|
Review Date: Jul 6, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Can't beat the price, ultra-sharp, great color/contrast, excellent in low light
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality is not so high, slow and noisy autofocus
|
|
|
I bought this as my first lens for the Nikon D70. This lens is truly a gem for $100-- awesome color, contrast, and the price cannot be beat for a great indoor-use lens. This lens makes a terrific walkaround lens!
One thing that bothers me is the slowish and noisy autofocus, which precludes me from using it for theatre work as it would be distruptive to the performance.
The build quality is not so high, feels somewhat cheap and plasticky, although you do get what you pay for!
All in all, this lens is terrific if you want a general use or indoor-use lens, that has great color, contrast, and sharpness. If you are looking for a superfast af-ing or quiet lens for theatre performances, look elsewhere.
I give this lens 4.5/5 -- missing the .5 for the reasons noted above.
|
|
|
Jul 6, 2004
|
|
clonardo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 799
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $75.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, 52mm filters, sharp, great colors/contrast, (almost too) lightweight, fairly responsive AF, no visible CA yet
|
|
Cons:
|
feels cheap/plastic-y, flare handling disappointing, not internal focus
|
|
|
I wanted a sharp, low-light prime to add to my kit, and everyone needs a 50mm lens. I had a friend who decided she liked her cheap Sigma zoom better, used this lens once, and sold it to me for $75 (well, $80 with a UV filter).
This lens is really no good for sunsets, even stopped down. I was disappointed by the number of photos that exhibited flare. The photos were taken on a D70, maybe that was a contributing factor.. For everything else, it's sharp and contrasty. The pictures are acceptably sharp at f/1.8, but really look great from f/2.8-11 or so.
Unfortunately, I feel like I'm going to break this little plastic nub on my camera with normal use. The D70's not built to pro standards, but the plastic there feels much more solid than the stuff used in this lens. The focus ring and the front of the lens move during AF, which can be annoying if you rest your hand in the wrong place (the other lenses I have are IF and have caused me to develop bad habits).
All in all, it was worth the little bit of money I paid
|
|
|
May 15, 2004
|
|
GroovinPickle
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 189
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, speed, cost, weight
|
|
Cons:
|
None at this price
|
|
|
If this lens cost four times as much it would still be a good value. At around $100, it's a must-have. It's great for portrait shots as well as low-light performance.
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2004
|
|
Jeff Stevens
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 553
|
|
Review Date: Mar 4, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Value, Size, Sharpness from 2.8 on.
|
|
Cons:
|
For a hundred bucks, no cons what so ever.
|
|
|
I wanted a good low light and small lens for my D2H. This one fits the bill well. I'm very happy with it's output, and from f2.8 on it is very sharp. Focuses very fast on my D2H.
|
|
|
Mar 4, 2004
|
|
Sectarian
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Jan 26, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1888
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $99.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, low cost, super sharp, fast focus, good contrast & color rendition, no chromatic abberation, resists flare & ghosting.
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic barrel
|
|
|
The best deal, performance-wise, on any lens out there. Fanstastic prime, fantastic price.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
48
|
147322
|
Jun 20, 2014
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
94% of reviewers
|
$110.46
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.80
|
9.70
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
