Laura Delegal , Jan 29, 2009; 12:03 p.m.
Now that I better understand the "nomenclature" of Nikkor lenses, I’d like some suggestions from the Nikon experts. I’m looking at a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 and leaning toward the f/1.8. I want a good all-around lens that could also be used for indoor sports such as basketball and volleyball. Since one of my all-time favorite lenses was a Pentax SMC PENTAX M 50 f/1.4, which had excellent bokeh, I wanted to purchase something similar for use with my Nikon D80 and D50. I don’t know whether to go with the prime lens or try for a zoom with a large maximum aperture, such as the 24-85mm f/2.8. It seems that with a fixed lens I get more bang for my buck, but the zoom seems to give more flexibility. Any suggestions?
FYI I currently own these lenses:
- Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G EDII - my least favorite - don’t even know what to do with it
- Nikkor AF 85mm 1:1.8 D - great for portraits good for indoor sports too
- Nikkor AF 80-200mm f/2.8 ED - great for high school football
- Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 G IF ED - great for high school baseball
Edward Ingold 
, Jan 29, 2009; 12:15 p.m.
A 50mm lens will take in nearly half the court from the stands. That makes for rather unexciting basketball photos. The 50/1.8 has excellent sharpness and costs about $80. The 50/1.4 is also sharp and 2/3rd stop faster for about $280. In either case, try to get a place on the floor under a basket.
The best lens you could buy for indoor sports is probably a Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR. Except for the 85/1.8, your current lenses are too slow for indoor sports or too long for shooting without a tripod.
Bruce Margolis 
, Jan 29, 2009; 12:24 p.m.
Laura, I have no idea where you are sitting for indoor volleyball and basketball but you say your 85mm prime is good for indoor sports. I am not sure why you would want a wider lens like the 50mm prime if the 85mm seems to work for you.
Basically, both lenses are excellent but typically used for different purposes. However, if you are somewhat close to the action, there is no reason you can't put one on your D50, the other on the D80.
Carl Becker , Jan 29, 2009; 12:51 p.m.
If your Pentax SMC PENTAX M 50 f/1.4 was on film and you are currently using Nikon DX bodies and you want the same field of view the Pentax SMC PENTAX M 50 f/1.4 gave then you should look for something in the 30 to 35mm range. Probably the Sigma 30mm f1.4 or maybe the Nikkor 35mm f2. Are you to close to use the Nikkor 85mm f1.8 and need a wider field of view?
Primes tend to be faster, lighter, smaller and cheaper at the expense of versatility. F2.8 zooms tend to be big, heavy and expensive
Laura Delegal , Jan 29, 2009; 01:08 p.m.
Edward, thanks for the input. Do you think the $200 difference in the 1.4 and 1.8 is justified? Seems to make the 1.8 a bargain.
Bruce, in order to use the 85/1.8 for indoor sports, I have to sit in the stands, which gets really crowded with basketball. I'd rather be able to move around a bit more to get a little closer to the action.
Carl, I didn't realize there was any difference in the field fo view between a film and digital camera. Wow, one more thing to learn and consider in the world of photography. Thanks.
Bernie Moore CT 
, Jan 29, 2009; 01:59 p.m.
Laura, I have been shooting bball (just starting) with my 50 1.8 and the results are technically good. I even kick it to to 2.8 and still get decent exposures. (I did this to see if I could use my 70-200) Next game I'm taking my 70-200 as I want to get more closeups.( I use a monopod) The 50 while technically good tends to leave you with "snapshots" which are boring. I am assuming you will be held to the spectator seats. Another thing that surprised me is that through the lens the little guys (Jr. High) tend to be a long way from the basket. It's a bear trying to get the player and the basket in the same shot. As to the 1.4 or 1.8 I suggest the 1.8 and use the difference on the monopod. Stability of the camera is essential in low light.Good luck; it's a lot of fun.
50 1.8 (2.8) 1/80 ISO400
Erica Cooper , Jan 29, 2009; 02:11 p.m.
I shot an indoor basketball game last week and wished I had a lens faster than my 18-200 but longer than my 50 mm f/1.4. If I can ever save up the money, I'd love to have an 85mm fast prime. If you really want the 50mm, I suggest you buy one of the cheap-o 50mm f/1.8, I've heard it's a great lens, and I love my 50mm, although I think it's a bit too short for making tight sports shots. If you're going to continue shooting sports, you're going to want fast glass, period. Your 85mm sounds perfect, you should keep working with that.
Owen O'Meara 
, Jan 29, 2009; 02:13 p.m.
Laura:
The 1.8 is a true bargain but the 1.4 is a better lens because it is faster and it has a much better build. Either one is good but I opted for the 1.4 and have no regrets. My old 1.8 simply wore out. The 85 1.8 is a wonderful buy.
-Owen
Robert Budding , Jan 29, 2009; 02:15 p.m.
I used to use the 50/1.8 on a DX camera when shooting from the baseline close to the boards. But I no longer use the 50mm much since I purchased an FX camera. So now I use the 85/1.8 for under the boards. And I use a 180/2.8 ED when I shoot from the corners or mid-court. It's challenging to frame really tight shots, and DOF is always a challenge.
Here's a shot taken down the length of the court with the 180/2.8. No foul was called - but the ref did rule that there was a travel:
Travel
Robert Budding , Jan 29, 2009; 02:17 p.m.
Your 80-200/2.8 should work well if the lighting is good. Here's a tighter shot, also shot with the 180/2.8 :
Drive
