bertnie

Hello all,
Was wondering : What are other advantages to a wide aperture lens(1.8, 1.4, etc.) other than the ability to shoot in low light and the bokeh
that a lot of them produce.
Thanks for your attention!

Bert

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

You get to spend more money, often a lot more for that shallow DOF. :) Aren't those two alone reason enough? If not, you don't need it. It's a little like asking why buy a 600MM lens other than to bring far off objects closer.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Better auto-focus in any light and higher shutter speeds....and lower ISO's.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

Brighter view in your viewfinder at any aperture. Can be a help to older eyes.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

only if you are using an optical TTL VF .....and yes, easier manual focusing - you all remember that ?

lsaguy Loc: Udall, KS, USA

As a continuing ed student now trying to learn photography, might I suggest the book "Understanding Exposure". You're asking a question that I am just now learning to employ in my attempts to make better photographs. The latest edition, no. 4 I believe, is a great way to learn the elements of what gives a shot just the right depth of field to highlight the features I want sharp.
As for cost, if you're looking to experiment on the cheap, try thrift shops for early Pentax lenses with the Praktika threaded mounts. You can get a 50mm f1.4 and an adapter for your camera for under $50 and play around with DOF to your hearts content.
Good luck and take care,
Rick

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Well, maybe not!

It happens that an optical viewfinder restricts the aperture, usually to about f/2. Some a little wider some a little less. But the fact is that looking through the viewfinder and opening an f/1.2 lens up from f/2 to f/1.4 to f/1.2 simply won't make any difference in perceived DOF or image brightness.

Before Auto Focus, when we had to focus by sight through the viewfinder, that made f/1.2 lenses a bit hard to accurately focus. The DOF is significantly more narrow than what the viewfinder shows, so the only way to do it was to rock the focus back and forth to try to find a "center" between it going out of focus in front of and then behind. A calculated guess!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

And you get a bigger, heavier lens.

Gaston

Good point!

Gaston

Good point !

Carl D Loc: Albemarle, NC.

I have a frensaled area on my Nikon viewfinder which makes it easy and quick for me to focus.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Bragging rights

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Until you try it, and find out that f/1.2 lens is no brighter in the viewfinder than an f/2.

Opening up a lens to f/1.8 from f/2.8 is probably something you can actually see. But there simply is not difference in the viewfinder between an f/1.8 lens and an f/1.2 lens. None. The aperture of the viewfinder restricts it to about f/2.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

What other reasons do you need. I have a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 lens and it is one of my "portrait" lenses on my D7100 (DX / Crop camera) and a good genera lens on both the D70s, D7100 and D610. Yes, I have a Tamron 10-24mm wide zoom but the aperture is considerably higher f/3.5-4.5 depending on zoom, a Nikkor 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX, a Nikkor 70-300 (older model) f/4 - 5.6 depending on zoom, and an 80-400 (older model) f/4.5-5.6 depending on zoom. I love the zooms a lot for what they are but I also understand the limitations. I can shoot the higher aperture lenses at higher ISO and give up resolution in low light (and possibly the inability to auto focus or focus at all) or I can put the 50mm f/1.4 on a DX and have the rough approximation of a 75mm 1.4 lens at ISO 100 in low light without necessarily having to go to a tripod or worry about subject movement. Or I can shoot the same 50mm lens on my D610 and have a beautiful 50mm shot. The bokeh is just added pleasure. Also, the 10-24mm lens is DX so it will put the D610 into DX mode if I use it on the D610 camera (the Tamron 10-24 approximates the equivalent of a 15-36mm lens on an FX camera so it isn't quite as wide as you would think). My Nikkor 80-400mm lens is the older model which uses the camera's internal focus motor and is not as fast focusing nor does it have the nanocrystal glass coating, but the lens is an FX lens and is remarkable for focus and stability at reasonably long distances. It does have VR1 and does great for nature and portraits. The 18-70mm lens is a good "tweener" lens but it also is a DX making the approximate length 26-105 mm and if I put it on an FX camera the camera will automatically shift to DX mode so it will always be the 26-105 regardless of camera. It also is a good lens but not nearly as fast as the 50mm 1.4 which (on a DX or cropped sensor camera) falls right in the middle of the 18-70 lens but better aperture and at the bottom end of the 70-300 on a DX or about 1/3 of the 70-300 on an FX camera. For me, the 50mm is a great tool to have in the arsenal.

bcrawf

You seem to be talking about viewing with the d-of-f button pressed. Isn't the lens open at its largest aperture during normal focusing? If so (which is how all my cameras operate), the lens with the greater aperture will give the brightest view during focusing.