In article
>
>I've been looking for a low-light fast lens for my F3 Nikon..(some
deleted)
>I've seen the three Nikon 50mm lenses advertised and wonder if anyone in
>this newsgroup has used one or more and could share the experience. If
>you could, please also cast your vote as regards price/performance.
See "Subjective Lens Evaluations, Updated (mostly Nikkors)". It is a
recent post listing MANY Nikkors I have used, with a subjective quality
rating based on my experience with using and informally testing the
lenses. Concerning your question (which has come up before):
- 50mm f1.8 (I am assuming the plastic [yuck!] barrel current AIS
version, though it is optically the same as the AF):
Good sharpness to the corners wide-open, though contrast is medium.
By about f4, performance is very good. No linear distortion.
- 50mm f1.4 (AIS and AF are optically the same):
Good sharpness to edges wide-open, but contrast is low. By f2,
performance is very good to edges, o.k. to corners. Some barrel
distortion.
- 50mm f1.2: Very good performance wide-open to the corners at optimum
focus distance (from about 4 to 15 feet), very good center
performance, but poor edges and corners wide-open near infinity
(fine near infinity to corners by about f5.6). Some barrel distortion.
As with most 35mm lenses, optimum center-to-corner performance is
reached about f8, though f4 will produce fine images with all of these
lenses. If you want even performance across the frame, low price,
low distortion, light weight, and small size, buy the 1.8. If you want
good contrast by f2 and can stand to lose a little in the corners at
wide apertures, take the 1.4. If you want top performance at wide
apertures, and can limit your wide-aperture photographs to subjects
that are fairly close, choose the 1.2. My choice, if I could own
only one (I own all three): the 50mm f1.4. Hope this helps.