therwol Loc: USA

The link doesn't go their page because of the ; after .com . This should work. http://cameradecision.com/

Trustforce Loc: Chicago, Illinois

No, you are misinterpreting the whole point of this question and the thread. I don't want cheap glass, I want what will give me both the best results AND the best "bang for the buck." My old micro 55 nikkor is great glass, and since I have the AI ring on it, I can use it with on the D850 (I'm very facile at manual focus after all these years). I am looking to get some AF-S lens in a prime to be able to get quick shots when I need them, that are excellent without the set up time required with my older AI glass. I'm trying to canvass the real world experience of fellow Hogs, and not just read reviews and tests.

I appreciate the response from everyone. Let me be a little more specific. I intentionally did not buy the 24-70mm f2.8 and opted for the 24-120mm to save weight to use it as a single "walk-around" lens for a coming trip (saving money didn't hurt either). Luckily, I got an excellent 24-120.

On the same token, I don't want to drop $2200 on the great nikkor 105mm f1.4 either. For landscapes and building interiors, a normal or mild wide angle perspective lens would be of more use. From all the responses and some of my reading, the major contenders are the Tamron 45mm f1.8 and the Sigma art 50mm f 1.4. The new Tokina opera 1.4 50 mm might be a possibility as well.

therwol Loc: USA

Yes, you have to have a lens in hand and use it on your camera to see what it will do for you. I only talked about lenses I own and also posted a picture taken with my 50mm AF D. Tests are a guide. As an owner of a 55mm f/3.5 Micro with an AI ring, I can agree with you that it's good glass. As an owner of the 24-120 f/4 VR, I can say that I'm not as satisfied with mine as you are with yours. Anyway, good luck. That Sigma is a brick for a prime, by the way.

tomcat

Even so, the 50mm Art lens is the best that I have ever used in my 50+years. I have to put on gloves to keep the sharpness from cutting my fingers when I view the prints. It's incredible that the sharpness will permit you to enlarge the images to 2x or 3x and still have the details present without pixelating. So often, I carry this as my only lens since I can use it as a 200mm. I would put it up against anything.

therwol Loc: USA

A good lens on a high resolution camera does give you the ability to crop heavily and still get a useable picture. I've done it myself in a pinch. I don't believe that you can do this with any 50mm lens and duplicate what you'd get with a 200mm lens that uses the whole sensor. I say this from experience. It all depends on how large you want to make your picture.

This boring picture was taken with my 50mm f/1.4 AF D on a Nikon D810. I can't upload the full picture tonight for some reason, so look at the crop that was taken from the original to see how much detail is still present. (Download and zoom in. Read the bags.)

I do think that the lens is the limiting factor here, but I didn't have a "better" lens to make a comparison picture.

(Download)

tomcat

I have attempted to attach two files for you. The first one is taken with the Sigma Art 50mm lens from far away. I added the crop area to the first image to show you how much I cropped it. I am guessing at least a 3-4 fold magnification. In the 2nd image, you can see the result. So my comment still stands that the Sigma Art series is an incredibly sharp lens. More so than the Nikon version. So any comparison between the quality of the Nikon or Canon 50mm with the Sigma Art 50mm will not hold water or be in the same ballpark with equivalent sharpness.

(Download)


(Download)

davefales Loc: Virginia

The composition of tomcat's cropped image is spectacular.

therwol Loc: USA

Very nice. At least you showed a picture taken in the real world to go with your opinion, which is what I did.

tomcat

Thanks. I try to back up my opinions with facts and pictures when I can because there are a lot of UHH'ers that sometimes will fire off an opinion or throw out a bunch of technical info that confuses more than it explains the answer sometimes. I took that shot a few years ago with a D800 resting on the railing of a pier for added stability in Ft Lauderdale. At the time we were walking around the pier I saw this commotion at the far end of the lagoon. I could not identify the jet pack person until I enlarged the image as much as I did. I thought it was cool to be able to see so clearly at that distance away. I like your shot also because it shows how a sharp image can be enlarged if the technique is done correctly. The lettering on the shopping bags was pretty cool. I used to have a Nikon 50mm until one of my friends showed me his Sigma Art 50mm. I wish that I could replace all of my glass with the Art series, but since I'm retired, I have to save my money for trips and meds. With no paying customers, some of us are limited for the toys we can have. Enjoyed sharing this with you.

therwol Loc: USA

I'm nearing retirement myself (a matter of months), and I think my spending will have to be scrutinized as well. If I had it to do over since buying my D810 in 2015, I might spend my money on a couple of outstanding lenses instead of a bunch of perhaps very good ones to save money. It doesn't really matter to me now. In fact, the D810 is more camera than I actually need for the pictures I take. I could have been happy with a D750, but my wife stood by me in the camera store (I bought it in a store!), cameras side by side, and said, "Go for it." No regrets

tomcat

I have a D750 myself and got it from a trade-in of the D800. The D800 was more than I needed and the files were getting so large that they were becoming unmanageable, avg image was >50mb. I also wanted the D750 because it was newer technology. I really do like the quality and sharpness of the D750 with the 70-200mm Nikon lens. I use it for general family photography for church and school events and portraits. I use my D500 for granddaughters' sports events (if I was still working tho I would get a D5 because a lot of what I shoot for the granddaughters' is low light and the D500 is noisy at 8000 ISO, even with my 85mm f/1.8 lens). Maybe one day I can catch one as a refurb

19104 Loc: Philadelphia

There is something that is pushed by the camera manufactures that only with a new lens can you take advantage of the newest sensors. This is pure hogwash. One of the reasons that I shoot with Nikon is because they have never changed the lens mount. I am constantly looking for for old lens (Some cheap and others not so) that i can use on my cameras. I ahve been presently surprised about the quality of most of the lens that I own. My favorite is the Medical Nikkor 200mm f 5.6 with built in modeling lights and flash. Of course Nikon is hyping up the old glass because obviously they don't make any money on used lenses. I own and use a 50mm f1.8 d quite a bit it never lets me down and it only cost me $28.00.

John

tomcat

I have an old 75/240 lens from the film days. A cheap lens with plastic mount, but it's really sharp. I only use it once and a while because it has to be manually focused. So those old lenses are indeed still useful.