Nikon 50 1.8 AIS long nose vs 50 2 AI?

[GarageBoy]

Is one sharper than the other and are there other subtle differences? Thanks

 

[redisburning]

Id go for a single coated f2 simply for the coating.

Ive had two 55/3.5 micro-nikkors; one MC and one SC, and I MUCH prefer the color balance of the SC lens. much less of the garrish nikkor color signature that was the only draw back to my later MC version. FWIW I have a 55/2.8 too and like with the 3.5 I think the color rendering of the older lens is much better (though the 2.8 IS sharper albeit with a noticeable mid zone dip not present in most slower macros).

 

[Ranchu]

They're both good, but for different reasons. The f2 has imo better color but the 1.8 has really good contrast. I prefer the f2 but it's really just a matter of taste.

 

[agoglanian]

I had the f/2 AI before and I loved it. I've heard really good things about the long nose 1.8 but I currently have a 1.4 AI which I've been enjoying despite the fact most people say it's useless.

 

[nobbylon]

I've recently bought another 50 f2 AI and have had in the past all the 50's. I couldn't detect much of a difference between the 1.8 and the F2 versions. The only lens out of the 50 f2 variants I had that gave a difference was a 50 H single coated which gave warmer results than later multi coated lenses.

 

[GarageBoy]

Thanks
I knew the f2 has that lovely wide open spherical aberration haze that I've grown to like
Was curious about the F1.8