Here are some photos that I've taken with my new lens Nikkor 50mm 1/1.8. It's one of Nikon's cheapest lenses (~$120). So far so good, especially for its price tag..... But seeing my friend's photo taken with the 50mm 1/1.4 lens (which is crystal clear, the lens itself is about ~$250). I guess you do get what you've paid for ....
I have summarized some good's and bad's if you are interested in reading....
* Narrow depth of field, which gives you that blurry background effect.
* Great for portraiture and stilllife because it will eliminate any busy background.
* Fairly good for low light settings due to the wide aperture.
* Fairly sharp just with the autofocus function. Because I'm nearsighted and because the depth of field is so narrow, I'd rather just rely on autofocus.
* Beautiful bokeh effect. I love to play with different lighting and subtle effects, so definitely a plus.
* Not good for moving objects, such as small children, animals (especially the ones that are scared of camera or the ones you can't approach), etc
* Narrow depth of field..... It's also bad because if you are not focused spot on your object of interest, you'll get a bad blurry picture.
* Wide aperture. Because of the wide aperture, pictures come out overexposed or too bland if you shoot in daylight. Lack of contrast can be easily adjusted with any editting tool. However, overexposure in digital photography simply means loss of data. Even the best photo editting program won't be able to restore the data.
* When you shoot at very low light, pictures won't be very sharp if it's handheld. A tripod or a stable surface will be your best bet.
* Due the narrow depth of field, this lens is not very good for family portraiture or if multiple people are present because someone's face can be out of focus.
* Not good for shooting in a confined space. Since the lens is 50mm and objects will appear closer than seen with naked eyes, you do need to back up physically. If it's a small or crowded room, you might not be able to get the picture you want.