Which one would you recommend? 50mm 1.2 or 1.4?
Do you think that at full aperture a Nikon 50mm 1:1.4 is enough or it's better to use the 1:1.2 (which cost much more)?
Thanks!

the 50 1.2's are not very sharp wide open..... you'd end up stopping down anyways...... the 1.4's are the sweet spot!

If you can get a 50mm 1.2 (for cheap $$) then go for it. You can always pick up a 1.4. I just picked up a 1.4 (in great shape) for $50.

I think that a 1.2 closed to 1.4 is sharper than a 1.4 full open.
Anyway i'm bidding in ebay a 1.2, a 1.4 and a 85mm 1.8

1.2 would look like total crap

1.2 would look like total crap

why? Those pics doesn't look like crap:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikkor50s/pool/page3/

define crap? the flicker pics are a tad tiny weeny to judge image quality.... I could take pics with my phone that look that good at that size.

The 1.2 I had was no where near the res as my 1.4..... and the 1.4 was no where near the 55 micro.

Besides... If your going for a berry lyndon look .... then go for the 1.2.... and with a dof adaptor between the cam and lens, u'd be hard pressed to tell much rez dif anyhow.

and if you want crazy dof.... try a lensbaby 3.0 ( google it )

EDITED WITH CORRECTION AND ADDITIONS.

Resolution of the old metal bodied f1.2, for video and groundglass relay purposes, is not inferior to the f1.8 with the specimens I have.

They both resolve the horizontal "B" block (864 TV lines) on the Lemac chart wide-open and the f1.2 has fine scratches in the coating on the front element and still comes in sharp enough. It is not so good against strong light.

I bought the f1.2 because it was there to be had cheaply. I think I would go for the f1.4 otherwise.

The Micro-Nikkor 55mm is a sweet lens, but only f3.5 I think.

Christopher, Now i'm very confused.

sorry..... If your after as much/less dof as possible, then get the 1.2.

but don't expect your reaction to be " wow... that's really sharp!"

it's all relative right? Yu don't know really how good something is unless you have something to compare it with that's better or worse. and shallow dof is so subjective..... as it art.

go for it..... and let us know how it works out!

sorry..... If your after as much/less dof as possible, then get the 1.2.

but don't expect your reaction to be " wow... that's really sharp!"

it's all relative right? Yu don't know really how good something is unless you have something to compare it with that's better or worse. and shallow dof is so subjective..... as it art.

go for it..... and let us know how it works out!

I think I've brought this up before that the amount of resolution resolved by the camcorder is less than a 1.2f resolves wide open anyway. In either case, it's good habit to use all lenses closed down a little, I prefer 5.6, and 5.6 on a 1.2 is going to be brighter than 5.6 on a 1.4, while resolution will be negligible.

sorry..... If your after as much/less dof as possible, then get the 1.2.

but don't expect your reaction to be " wow... that's really sharp!"

it's all relative right? Yu don't know really how good something is unless you have something to compare it with that's better or worse. and shallow dof is so subjective..... as it art.

go for it..... and let us know how it works out!

You are saying that a f/1.2 will be less sharp within the focus field, or just that it will just have more bokeh?

yes... more bokeh.

and..... 5.6 is 5.6 on any lens built to iso specs.... otherwise light meters would be useless.

and yes..... the 1.2 wide open will be fine with a dof adaptor..... but noticebly less sharp on a full frame chip like a RED or a dslr.

Don't get me wrong..... it's a really cool lens to have.... and looks really cool.... and heavy! but if you stop down to 1.4 or 5.6 then your wasting your money on the extra stop you won't ever use.

if your flush with cash.... the contax 35-135 is one sweet jewel of a lens. at f3.5, not the fastest. a big chunk of glass, and looks simular to a cook

Extreme DOF is what i want. I already have a 28-85 f/3.5/4.5 which has a very limited dof and will be my "reserve" lens. But for extreme DOF (while mantaining sharpness in the focused spot) is my goal.
Due to budget, for now i buy a 50mm 1.4.
Then i will buy a 50mm 1.2, an 85mm 1.2 and a rectilinear wide.

go for it... I'm cuious to see the results!

canon also made a 50mm f.95 lens for it's rangefinders... with radioactive elements no less.... http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon7_095_06.jpg

another consideration for very shallow dof.... is to build an adaptor that has a 120mm GG as in a medium format camera like a hasselblad, and find a 110mm f2 ziess lens.... I have one of these f2's with my hassy and it is very sharp wide open, with very shallow dof simular to a 50 1.2 for 35mm format.
One advantage of an adaptor like this would be the possible abilty for it to be static as it's larger gg will in turn have finer grain ( size ratio ).

Another thing.... a little off topic... I have not seen anyone useing any shift lens' with adaptors yet..... the 24PC would create some really cool street scenes.

Another thing.... a little off topic... I have not seen anyone useing any shift lens' with adaptors yet..... the 24PC would create some really cool street scenes.

Sorry for my ignorance, but what do you mean?

here is a canon shift lens....

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/tilt_and_shift_ts-e.html

nikon as well as other brands have them as well..... they allow you to shift the plane of the image up or down while keeping the vertical line in the shot parallel.... like a 4X5 large format camera.... mainly used by architectural photographers ( although not so much since some correction can be made in photoshop now ) here's more info: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/tilt-shift

and here's the ultimate poor mans version: http://www.orbit1.com/dailyphotos.aspx?photoid=785

looks like I killed another thread.... bad habbit... sorry!

here is a canon shift lens....

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/tilt_and_shift_ts-e.html

nikon as well as other brands have them as well..... they allow you to shift the plane of the image up or down while keeping the vertical line in the shot parallel.... like a 4X5 large format camera.... mainly used by architectural photographers ( although not so much since some correction can be made in photoshop now ) here's more info: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/tilt-shift

and here's the ultimate poor mans version: http://www.orbit1.com/dailyphotos.aspx?photoid=785

I'm not quite sure how this lens would be beneficial in a motion picture/video situation.

I'm sorry, but everytime I hear about lense talk...I get confused.

I'm about to buy some lenses, BUT when I go look on E-bay....I see NIKON or NIKOR FD....or AI....PL.....

...What the heck are those abbreviations? How do you know if you are buying the right lense?

Plus, what exactly is f1.2 and f1.4....

sorry, but if there is another thread with this info...I would appreciate it.

Sorry....lens....not lense....

google is your friend!

but here's the basics....

F stop or apature is the iris inside the lens.... when all the way open, it's at its lowest number ( like f1.4 ), it lets in the most light and also has the shortest depth of field ( only a few inches in focus). When all the way closed like f22 ( it's smallest hole opening ) it lets in the least amount of light and has greater depth of field ( from right in front of the camera to all the way to infinity ). each number F stop represents half as much light let thru... so, from F5.6 to F8 you'd get half as much light.

Still camera makers like nikon, canon, contax, pentax, olympus etc.... all make/made their own lens's.... nikon and canon are currently the most abundant and market leaders in their product type.....

but.... for a DOF adaptor, you will want a lens that fits the mounts offered by the adaptor maker.... your choices are probably canon or nikon in older non auto focus lens's which are not manufatured anymore. Both are very good lens makers.... and being that nikon's new digital SLR cameras can use the older nikon (nikkor) lens, they still hold there high price. Canon's older manual focus mound (FD or FL) on the other hand do not fit on the newer canon camera bodys... so their price has dropped very low in recent years which makes them a bargain for their optical quality.

Redrock also offers a canon EOS ( the newer and current auto focus lens' ) but the draw back is that you can't change your F stop without some awkward tricks ( redrocks FAQ on there website has more info )

so...... most of the folks here that are going for the best quality for the least amount of money tend to go with the older canon FD or FL lens'... and the 50mm f1.4 FD is the 1st one they get.

I probably stepped over the line when I brought up contax and shift lens'.... but being a professional still photog for 20 years has made me very familiar with still lens'.... and sometimes adapting a lens from one brand to fit on a camera of another brand in a frankinstien manner creats some very cool images.