i have the 55-200, its a great lense i am thinking of the 35mm 1.8 with autofocus so it will work on my d40
I've got a d40 too, which is why i had to get the AF-S 50mm F1.4, it has the motor built in like the 35mm 1.8.
Can't comment on the 55-200 as I have never used one (other than the fact that having the extra reach of a telephoto is awesome!) I have used a (manual) 50mm f/1.4 though, they are unbelievable, the DOF is so thin and the bokeh is stunning! mine with a 50mm f/1.4: http://www.flickr.com/photos/oliwoods/tags/f14/
I thought long and hard about that one too, the 1.4 cost nearly twice as much but in the end i got the 1.4 as it gives 2/3rd of one stop extra light and will be more future proof being suitable for full-frame cameras too. Whereas the 35mm is only for DX, although i hear DX is a sensor format with a long and bright future... I'm treating it as a REALLY long-term investment
Nice photos! But you knew that already judging by the comments on that site I can't wait to see how good it is in low light... People are even talking about using it in moon light
I have the 55-200 and it's a good lens. I have the 1.8 50mm and that is brilliant, so I bet the 1.4 will be cracking. Don't forget to post up lots of your photos
i would have got that too if i had a motorised body, i would have actually been cheaper to buy an 2nd hand motorised body and the F1.8 Although if you spead the extra cost of the 1.4 over 20 years and my next 2 - 3 bodys, it is peanuts, for a lot of pleasure i hope.....
my hotmail banners are now full of nikon lenses AF-S 50mm F1.4 funilly enough.....must have nicked the info from the order e mail.... Too late
F1.4 is AWESOME! i thought all that isolating the subject was bs, but i'm amazed at the results, i'm pro now I'm shocked at how good it is for people shots, Nikon AF-S 50mm F1.4 = highly recomended
Here's 'n example of how the F1.4 works. It isolates the subject in a pleasant haze, instead of it being surrounded by (eye) clutter: Makes a BIG difference on kid shots/portraits. With a normal lens the subject wouldn't stand out half as well from the two kids in the background. Highly recomended for anybody with kids.
I'm now officially well pleased with these two new lenses. If anything it's taught me how useful the original kit lens is. I can now see the benefit of the 18 - 200 zoom, not having to change all the time between the 18 - 55 and the 55 - 200. I didn't get that because it was loads more than the 55 - 200 (310 quid more) and is of lesser quality in some respects than the 55 - 200. Although i can see i will be missing shots while changing. I will probabaly get a 2nd (2nd hand) body for the 55 - 200. Sorted! for lesss than 310 quid too
The 35mm F1.8 would be a good choice After a few months use i find the 50mm F1.4 a bit un-handy being equivalent to ~75mm on a DX. You need to be a fair distance away from the subject for the indoor family shots i need, the room is often too small. 35mm on a DX would be ideal IMO and a full-frame DSLR will downsize its sensor to work with DX lenses I don't think the difference between 1.4 and 1.8 is that great, certainly on Aperture priority, the shutter time doesn't change that much between the F1.8 and 1.4, if at all sometimes. I'm not sorry i bought it, i made a concious descision to get the best available. If i hadn't got the 1.4 i'd always be wondering what it was like and what i was missing. Now i know
1.4 vs 1.8 is only 2/3rds of a stop.. but it does make a difference! Ive got the canon version 1.8 (cost me 50quid) and its sharper than my 70-200 that cost 1250
That's the limitation of a prime lens. I must admit, when I'm using my F1.8, I sometimes try to twist the zoom, only to find it's not there! Still a great lens, though and good value for money, compared with some lenses.
