Nikon 50mm F1.8D AF Lens


Recommended Posts

I just looked a bit and it seems a really great lens... There's obviously more experienced people in these forums that will inform you... but I might actually buy this too!!! I'm just a teenager... I don't really have many things to spend my money on... and if I don't spend it now I'll buy something stupid later on down the road... 160 bucks (Canadian) is chump change when your working and in highschool haha!! I have an older 50mm 1.4 my uncle gave me, but I may buy this just for the AF...

I'd say go for it, I'm assuming your shooting with a DX... which means the 50mm is like a 75... which is great for portraits!! Some people may say a longer focal length... but I'm sure you already knew that...

Yup the D5000 has a crop factor of 1.5 so all your lenses you use on there are comparable to the lenses on an FX format camera e.g. D3 when you multiply the focal length by 1.5... so my 70-300 VRII is like a 105-450 on FX... so if I were to put my 70-300 on a D3 it would act as a 70-300 but since it's on my D90 I get a lot more "reach"... 1.5x more reach to be exact

Exactly... although to you it doesn't mean much because you're always using your DX camera... but if you were to say pick up a D3 with a 55-200 (non DX lens) then you'll be all wierded out because it doesn't seem to zoom as much as when you used your D5000... e.g. it will look wider...

But DX lenses don't really translate over to FX well... so you'll still get the same apparent view but you won't get full quality... on say the D3 it will automatically crop the DX lens so your 55-200 still looks like a 90-300 BUT if you get a lens MEANT for FX such as my 70-300 it will infact look like a 70-300 on FX but again, on my DX it comes up as a 105-450 because of the crop factor... :)

...unless it's a Nikon DX labeled lens, then the crop factor is already figured in, so a 50mm DX is a 50mm lens, not a 75mm.

is that right though? sorry I may be wrong, and I am on a lot of Codeine right now cause I just had my wisdom teeth taken out LOL but if say you get the 10-24mm DX lens... I don't think its been figured in already... I am pretty sure its still like a 15mm-36mm... I only say this because 10mm seems... really wide... LOL especially since the 13mm "Holy grail" f/5.6 is hailed for being such a wide lens :p ... I could have misunderstood what you said though (:

Keeping to that idea of being labeled DX... the 50mm 1.8D AF lens your looking at is an 'FX' lens so yes it will look like "75mm" on your D5000 haha (:

is that right though? sorry I may be wrong, and I am on a lot of Codeine right now cause I just had my wisdom teeth taken out LOL but if say you get the 10-24mm DX lens... I don't think its been figured in already... I am pretty sure its still like a 15mm-36mm... I only say this because 10mm seems... really wide... LOL especially since the 13mm "Holy grail" f/5.6 is hailed for being such a wide lens

That's at least what I've been told. I own a Nikon D90, and both a 50mm DX and a 50mm non-DX and can see the difference. The 50mm DX looks like a 50mm should, and the 50mm non-DX lens on the D90 does seem like it is more along the lines of a 75mm.

I am still lusting after the 10.5 MM DX http://www.adorama.com/NK105DXU.html and yes, that is a darn wide lens.

That's at least what I've been told. I own a Nikon D90, and both a 50mm DX and a 50mm non-DX and can see the difference. The 50mm DX looks like a 50mm should, and the 50mm non-DX lens on the D90 does seem like it is more along the lines of a 75mm.

I am still lusting after the 10.5 MM DX http://www.adorama.com/NK105DXU.html and yes, that is a darn wide lens.

Well I mean if you have both lenses and can SEE there is a difference then there is no arguing haha, there's probably some weird reason for that, I'm not sure, but no yeah the 10.5 is pretty wide, I don't really like fish eye though, maybe as a novelty but I wouldn't (right now) spend that much on a fisheye haha, but yeah I read in the description that the 10.5mm is like a 16mm in 35mm format (which is equal to FX I BELIEVE)... so i don't know why sometimes the DX format looks as it should (like your 50mm) but in other cases it doesn't e.g. with this 10.5mm DX fisheye

And the D thing, that's to do with measuring depth?? :s

In a sense, I actually don't know too much about this... but a tiny bit... one thing, I've never actually seen newer lenses labeled "D" and that's because (I think) that every lens now adays is "D" so they don't bother labeling it now... I think the only change this lens has opposed to one without "D" is essentially what you said, it is just a way of the lens being able to tell the camera at what distance it is focused at... so I guess like in your camera info (digitally) it will say the subject was in focus at 4.9 feet from the lens or whatever and it knows this because the lens was a "D" lens... a more important/useful feature of this I guess is for when you are using flash... because if the camera knows how far/close the subject it is it can more easily calculate how strong of a flash to use... that's just my guess though don't quote me on that.!!

I saw that you wrote you had a D5000? If so, the 50mm lens you bought won't autofocus on your camera. Still a great lens to own, just no AF since the D5000 doesn't have a built in motor.

I was thinking the same thing.

The nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-S G lens does have an internal motor (or there is a sigma equivalent) but more pricey though.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!