[Student]

I decided to get one because everyone kept going on how great this lens was and quite honestly I'm not sure I like it. For Portraits I still prefer my Nikkor 85mm 1.8, not that it isn't sharp or anything but the build quality feels so much like plastic and then the moving part that comes in and out of the lens makes the whole thing seem very fragile to the point where I end up not using it. Maybe I'm also used to the 85mm too much...

What do you think of the 50mm 1.4G? Does it work for you?

[deadwolfbones]

from what I've read at FredMiranda, etc, it sounds like a lot of otherwise fanatical Nikkor lovers prefer the Sigma 50/1.4... as far as I can tell, the Nikon 50/1.4 isn't one of the best-loved Nikons.

Me, I stick with my 50/1.2 Ai...

[Bart]

I would say it depends on what you want to use it for.
For portrait, I'm not surprised you like your 85mm better. The opposite would be strange.

The resolution on the Nikkor is more evenly spread across the frame than that of the Sigma.
Perhaps not unlike the difference between DA 70 and FA 77 - should they have the exact same focal length.

I have used the Nikkor 50G and it has not disappointed me and I used some good equivalents on Pentax.
As for the build quality, I don't see any problem there either.

[K-9]

Most reviews I've seen point to the 50mm f1.8D as the best value/performance Nikkor 50mm. There is supposed to be a 50mm f1.8G out very soon, but I'm sure it will be over the $200 price range. The best thing about the 1.8D is the current $140 price vs the great optical quality you get from it.

I personally did not purchase the 50mm 1.4G due to it's higher barrel distortion than any of their other 50's, and some LoCA issues at the widest apertures.

I've read good things about the Sigma, but as with any of their lenses, you have to get the right sample.

Keep in mind, if you are not shooting in tight spaces, you really don't have to have a 50 and an 85mm lens. Just take a few steps back with the 85 and you'll be fine in most cases. I shot for years with only an 85 and a 35mm and never needed a 50. That's the main reason I got the 1.8D, it's so cheap that I don't mind if I don't use it much.

[Aegon]

The 50/1.4G is one of my most used lenses on Nikon.

In my opinion, there is nothing special about it, and I rarely use it at 1.4 because the bokeh gets too busy.

I wanted to try the ring type motor and this was the most reasonably priced option. Focusing isn't quicker. It may be slightly more accurate, but not noticeably so.

Further, it lacks the Nano Crystal coating of Nikon's better lenses, and the results show. It isn't very resistant to flare.

That said, I really like this lens on film, and I'm happy with f/1.4 on film too. The busy factor is negated by the lesser sharpness of film. It looks great on film. This makes me think that it might look great on a D700 too, which has larger photosites than a D7000.

This lens isn't a stinker. Neither is it special.

[luke0622]

I decided to get one because everyone kept going on how great this lens was and quite honestly I'm not sure I like it. For Portraits I still prefer my Nikkor 85mm 1.8, not that it isn't sharp or anything but the build quality feels so much like plastic and then the moving part that comes in and out of the lens makes the whole thing seem very fragile to the point where I end up not using it. Maybe I'm also used to the 85mm too much...

What do you think of the 50mm 1.4G? Does it work for you?

nothing special about it, a lot of people still prefer 50mm/1.4D, it has slower focusing...