Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Prime
AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4D compared AF Nikkor 60mm micro f/2.4D to advice please.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 223616" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>60 mm is f/2.8, this 50 mm is f/1.4 (which is two stops difference)</p><p>60 mm is telephoto on DX, 50mm is slightly less telephoto.</p><p>60 mm can focus to a couple of inches for 1:1 magnification. 50mm cannot get that close.</p><p></p><p>Do you have a FX camera? 50 mm was considered the "normal" lens on 35mm film cameras (FX). Normal width of view (on FX), deemed important because its view sort of matched the view the human eye thinks it sees there (on FX). On DX, it is a telephoto view.</p><p></p><p>50mm is mild telephoto on a DX camera. Indoors, imagine you wanted a picture of four people on a couch. Being telephoto, your room size may not permit you to back away far enough to get all four in the picture view. Try this with your zoom lens set to 50mm, to see the effect. Often, dim views are indoor views (limited space).</p><p></p><p>Anyway, 50mm is deemed important for a couple of reasons.</p><p>It was a normal lens on FX, however it is telephoto on DX. "Normal" was a concept in the old days, before zoom lenses. It was the one you needed most. Zoom lenses cover many more situations.</p><p>One version is f/1.8, which zoom lenses are not.</p><p>And the f/1.8 was about the least expensive lens, for a long time not much more than $100 US.</p><p>The f/1.4 is much more pricey, and is only 2/3 stop wider.</p><p>The depth of field will be very small at such apertures.</p><p>But the f/1.8 is a very sharp lens at more nominal f/stops. It just cannot zoom for other situations.</p><p></p><p>The 35mm f/1.8 lens would be considered more of a "normal" lens for DX.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 223616, member: 12496"] 60 mm is f/2.8, this 50 mm is f/1.4 (which is two stops difference) 60 mm is telephoto on DX, 50mm is slightly less telephoto. 60 mm can focus to a couple of inches for 1:1 magnification. 50mm cannot get that close. Do you have a FX camera? 50 mm was considered the "normal" lens on 35mm film cameras (FX). Normal width of view (on FX), deemed important because its view sort of matched the view the human eye thinks it sees there (on FX). On DX, it is a telephoto view. 50mm is mild telephoto on a DX camera. Indoors, imagine you wanted a picture of four people on a couch. Being telephoto, your room size may not permit you to back away far enough to get all four in the picture view. Try this with your zoom lens set to 50mm, to see the effect. Often, dim views are indoor views (limited space). Anyway, 50mm is deemed important for a couple of reasons. It was a normal lens on FX, however it is telephoto on DX. "Normal" was a concept in the old days, before zoom lenses. It was the one you needed most. Zoom lenses cover many more situations. One version is f/1.8, which zoom lenses are not. And the f/1.8 was about the least expensive lens, for a long time not much more than $100 US. The f/1.4 is much more pricey, and is only 2/3 stop wider. The depth of field will be very small at such apertures. But the f/1.8 is a very sharp lens at more nominal f/stops. It just cannot zoom for other situations. The 35mm f/1.8 lens would be considered more of a "normal" lens for DX. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Prime
AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4D compared AF Nikkor 60mm micro f/2.4D to advice please.
Top