Which 50mm nikkor lens should I buy?

[jorg]

Hey All,
I'm new hear, and this is my first thread. I got myself a Nikon D7000 recently, and I'm reading a lot about it & digital photography in general here and in various books. I figure that I really need a 50mm lens for pics of my kids and so on. But now: which one should I buy?
1) AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8D, or
2) AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4D, or
3) AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G

Let's ignore the price for a moment. 2 & 3 have a higher maximum aperture, so that would mean that these are 'faster', right? 3 has on top more lenses and a silent wave motor, making focusing more silent!? But is this really an advantage? As 3 is more expensive, does it show in the quality of pictures? Which lens is more flexible for general usage?

As you can see, just learning my way around ... thanks a million for any tips in advance.

[Fraucha]

Well since you are using a DX camera I would look at the Nikkor 35 mm f1.8 for about $200. It is an excellent lens and with the crop factor it works out to be about 52mm. if you buy an actual FX 50mm you will be looking at roughly 75mm, sorta mini telephoto.

Yeah, the lower the f-stop the more light it lets in, hence "faster" but at the lens suggested you will be totally thrilled. I would only buy the actual 50mm if I was considering moving to a FX format: D700, or one of the D3 family.

[autofocus]

you may find this little tidbit useful
Nikon 50mm f/1.4 AF-S

Also, I read a test report a while back comparing the f/1.8 to the f/1.4, and the overall results seem to favor the less expensive f/1.8. Unfortunately, I can't remember where I saw the article. The long and the short of it is you probably will be happy with whichever one you choose. And as the previous poster noted, the f/1.8 35mm is also a nice lens, and a bargain at the price

[scootermcq]

Originally Posted by jorg

Hey All,
1) AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8D, or
2) AF NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4D, or
3) AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G

Let's ignore the price for a moment. 2 & 3 have a higher maximum aperture, so that would mean that these are 'faster', right? 3 has on top more lenses and a silent wave motor, making focusing more silent!? But is this really an advantage? As 3 is more expensive, does it show in the quality of pictures? Which lens is more flexible for general usage?

I have owned 1 & 2. The biggest difference between the 2 is the 1.8 is kinda soft focus until 3.5, and then it starts to rock, the 1.4 is sharp wide open (if you can nail focus) and is stupid sharp from 1.8. If you shoot in low light, it is not the half stop, but where it starts being usable.

the AF-S I can only go with what I have read, faster & quieter auto focus, focuses on any body and manual override on manual focus and internal focus, so no moving external parts to screw up. Performance is supposed to be the same as number 2 other wise.

[jorg]

Thanks everybody for the feedback, much appreciate it. I definitely gonna have a look at the Nikkor 35 mm f1.8 and test it.

Thanks a million
Jorg