Nikon 58mm 1.4G VS Nikon 50mm 1.4G

I will be shooting on a Nikon D800 body. I'm looking for another portrait lens besides my 85mm 1.4G. The 58mm looks like it's the same quality as my 85mm, and with it being 2x the price of the 50mm 1.4, is it worth it? Which do you feel is the better buy?

Or should I skip the 50mm/58mm for the 24-70mm 2.8?

I'd suggest the 80-200/2.8. It serves as an excellent portrait lens and (with a tripod) you have a great telephoto lens. The price on these lenses is really low due to the newer 70-200VR.

Check out Flikr's 80-200 gallery for some real life examples of what the lens can really do.

But for the two you're checking out, I'd pick the nifty-fifty.

24mm-70mm 2.8g.....More versatile..Also Matt Granger did a youtube video comparing the 2 ....The 58mm 1.4G was only slightly better then the 50mm 1.4g....

As sexy as fast lenses (F/1.4 and larger) sound, the extreme DoF can be very problematic. I second the 24-70mm recommend. Or if it's a prime you must have, go with the F/1.8, it's a better lens than the 1.4 and is half the price.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Honestly, the new 58/1.4 is a joke trying to bring up the Noct 1.2. If you want a Noct, get a Noct else save the money and get something actually useful.

The 50mm 1.4G is just as good as the 58 1.4G, so I would go with the 50mm. The 24-70 is a very nice lens, but I'm a bit biased towards primes, especially for the D800.

SacrificeTheory said:

I will be shooting on a Nikon D800 body. I'm looking for another portrait lens besides my 85mm 1.4G. The 58mm looks like it's the same quality as my 85mm, and with it being 2x the price of the 50mm 1.4, is it worth it? Which do you feel is the better buy?

Or should I skip the 50mm/58mm for the 24-70mm 2.8?

Click to expand...

you were almost correct with your statement. its 4x the amount. actually the 50 1.8G has been recorded as being faster and sharper than the 50 1.4g by tests. a 50 1.8g is what id get. cheap and must have focal length in the bag.

you have the 105 and 85 which are short teles and that should cover the portrait part for now. the 24-70 range is usually what wedding pros use for the bulk of the images. the 70-200 after and the specialty lenses like fisheye WA, portrait with shallow DOF. the 24-70 will be the most useful for you now.

no person should shoot a wedding without a 24-70/70-200 combo. or primes in those various FL. if youre daring.

If you want a fast lense, get the 50mm F1.2 AIS. It is cheaper than the others and available new.

I have the 58mm f1.4g, but it was bought for a very specific use, night photography. At this it excels and I believe, cannot be beaten. However, if you want a day to day lens, save your money and wait for the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art. I'll be getting one of those as my day time lens, it looks immense.

Cowleystjames said:

I have the 58mm f1.4g, but it was bought for a very specific use, night photography. At this it excels and I believe, cannot be beaten. However, if you want a day to day lens, save your money and wait for the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art. I'll be getting one of those as my day time lens, it looks immense.

Click to expand...

The Sigma 50mm 1.4 looks like a great lens...But why would it be your daytime lens over the nikkor 58mm 1.4 you already have? That makes no sense to me...

ShootRaw said:

The Sigma 50mm 1.4 looks like a great lens...But why would it be your daytime lens over the nikkor 58mm 1.4 you already have? That makes no sense to me...

Click to expand...

Some lenses are designed for very low light photography. The wide aperture helps, but the main design criteria is to reduce "comma". Many low light lenses including the "Noct" series from Nikon and Leica have excellent "comma" rendering - the points of light remain points and not flare up into ugly comma like shape. That said, the sharpness and micro contrast may or may not be at par with slower lenses at F2 or above. That is why you use one lense for very low light situation and another in day light.

The Nikon 50mm F1.2 is a day light lense and not a night lense (even though it is F1.2), as it has "comma" problems with light points, but it shines in day light at F1.2, and is one of the sharpest Nikons at F2 onwards.

As Aroy said regarding flare, the 58mm is beautiful in that area. Better than any other lens I've ever owned. But, and it's a big but, the autofocus can be truly rubbish in daylight situations, far worse than my 85mm f1.4 or one of the class leaders, the 24-70 f2.8.
And if I want to use it wide open in daylight then the softness is legendary. You may say when would I want f1.4 in daylight? Example; I was shooting outside Keble college in Oxford, for a local magazine and wanted to truly isolate the Dean of the college from the muddled surroundings of the city. The image at f1.4 was so soft that it was unusable. Thankfully, I'd taken a few at f2.0 and several using the 85mm f1.4g wide open, so I got what I wanted.
I struggle to understand how they can produce a great wide open lens like the 85mm but not carry it across to the 58mm?

Well the fact that the Sigma is not out for Nikon users yet. And unless you test that lens there is no way for you to make a prediction that the Sigma is going to be better as a daytime lens...The whole noct lens that the 58mm is supposed to be replacing is just marketing..It isn't even a 1.2 like the Noct..
Im not knocking on the 58mm 1.4 you have...But if I invested $1700 for that lens...I wouldn't even be thinking about spending another $1000 on a similar focal length lens..Just sayin...