Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New Nikon 35mm f/1.8 AF-S prime for $200 -- the "nifty fifty" for DX
- Thread starter rogersmj
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This lens is out but hard to find in stock. I had had a preordered from Amazon but a small camera shop online had it in stock and so I purchased it there. Very impressed with it so far.
My photo shop got two, one for the freelancer I work with, and another for myself....
We ordered at the same time.
Sad part is that they only got two, so the photogs in the area won't be getting their glass until the next shipment.
My photo shop got two, one for the freelancer I work with, and another for myself....
We ordered at the same time.
Sad part is that they only got two, so the photogs in the area won't be getting their glass until the next shipment.
I would appreciate your opinion on the lens, when you've had time to evaluate it
Photozone has reviewed the lens here: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/422-nikkor_35_18g
Seems to be a tentatively positive review, but not a stellar one.
Seems to be a tentatively positive review, but not a stellar one.
Thanks for the heads-up. I was hoping it would turn out to be a bit better (I recommended it to a friend when it was first announced, and he pre-ordered it immediately). At least the sharpness is really good. The other stuff can be corrected in PP.
I bought it release day (the 12th) from my pro shop. Its an excellent little lens. There isn't a better bargain out there. It works great on the D700 in FX mode (yes, that's not a type-o)
Same here, of course I may never have anything worth showing.
I picked up this lens the other day to shoot stage pics for my friends Shakespeare theater stuff. All low light. Hoping for some nice results next show. I put it on my father's D80 and snapped off a few pics at my VW/Audi meet up on Sunday while walking around visiting with everyone I haven't seen in about a year. I took my wife (Chinese girl in the pics) to the park afterward and played around with it a little more. Don't have those pics up anywhere yet.
I would appreciate your opinion on the lens, when you've had time to evaluate it
No problem. With the combination of vacation I have been able to do some junk shooting with this lens and the fiancee's D80.
I have to say that it's EXACTLY like the 50mm before it. A perfect "you should have this in your bag" lens at a "even I can get that lens with fast aperture and small build" cost.
Also like the 50mm it's not a super sharp and impressive lens. I am no lens nerd by any shot though, so don't expect any large fancy numbers. It's much faster at focusing, focuses better, quieter, closer and stays in focus during AF-C better than the 50mm 1.8.
The only bad news is that it's just as sharp as the 50mm 1.8, and to me that's not bad news. I love the AF-S that's been added to a lens that I already loved IQ wise.
I won't toss out, give up, sell my 50mm in the off chance I splurge for a D700.
p.s. sorry about not posting images, the clients have been wearing me thin for video production and not any stills. May post some crap photos soon.
How did I miss this! I've been crazy busy since about the announcement (promotion at work) so I guess that explains it.
I am SO GLAD that I opted for the Sigma 18-200mm VR late last year. I was deliberating between that lens, the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and the Nikon 50mm f1.4 at the time, but this lens is exactly what I wanted the Sigma and Nikon primes to be - cheap, fast, and a standard focal length.
This is SO coming home with me as soon as I pay off my new Hackintosh (Dell mini 9). Between the 18-200mm and this last prime I think I will be very lens satisfied for awhile (although I am going to hold my breath for a cheap ~50mm f/1.8 AF-S lens for portrait work, or just get a "real" nifty-fifty when I upgrade to D90 or something).
(Off-topic) FWIW, the Sigma 18-200mm VR is a fantastic all around lens. The image quality/color reproduction is, imo, a little better than the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens, the VR works great, it's HUGE but tolerable to lug around if you have a camera strap, the zoom and focus are very smooth, speaking of focus the AF is fast and accurate except when you get past about 65mm in very low light (the AF light on the D40 is blocked a little by the hugeness that is this lens), and it's just all around very impressive. I would say that if you have a D40 or D60 this is a lens to build around - get it to cover "everything" while you piece together all the specialty glass you need.
I am SO GLAD that I opted for the Sigma 18-200mm VR late last year. I was deliberating between that lens, the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and the Nikon 50mm f1.4 at the time, but this lens is exactly what I wanted the Sigma and Nikon primes to be - cheap, fast, and a standard focal length.
This is SO coming home with me as soon as I pay off my new Hackintosh (Dell mini 9). Between the 18-200mm and this last prime I think I will be very lens satisfied for awhile (although I am going to hold my breath for a cheap ~50mm f/1.8 AF-S lens for portrait work, or just get a "real" nifty-fifty when I upgrade to D90 or something).
(Off-topic) FWIW, the Sigma 18-200mm VR is a fantastic all around lens. The image quality/color reproduction is, imo, a little better than the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens, the VR works great, it's HUGE but tolerable to lug around if you have a camera strap, the zoom and focus are very smooth, speaking of focus the AF is fast and accurate except when you get past about 65mm in very low light (the AF light on the D40 is blocked a little by the hugeness that is this lens), and it's just all around very impressive. I would say that if you have a D40 or D60 this is a lens to build around - get it to cover "everything" while you piece together all the specialty glass you need.
Here are the pics with the new lens of my wife at the park I mentioned. Feel free to critique (except the wife part ). I can take it. I think I am getting close to pulling the trigger on a D90. We have a couple of nice trips coming up this summer. Road trip to San Diego seeing the Southwest (Grand Canyon, New Mexico etc) and my friends wedding in North Carolina at the beach.
). I can take it. I think I am getting close to pulling the trigger on a D90. We have a couple of nice trips coming up this summer. Road trip to San Diego seeing the Southwest (Grand Canyon, New Mexico etc) and my friends wedding in North Carolina at the beach.
Depends on how close you wanna get to the subjects. I prefers the 35mm for walk-abouts cause it's about the right field of view for me. Intimate, but not too close. If you want tighter shots, get the 50mm. And obviously, the 35mm is the DX equivalent of the 'normal' 50mm. You can also get the old 35mm f2. It's got no SWM, but it'll probly be cheaper. And according to some, slightly nicer than the new one.
The viewing angle of the 35 mm is much better suited to general photography. Also, you might want to take a look at a (used?) 20 mm f/2.8 or 24 mm f/2.8 lens which corresponds to 30 mm or 36 mm on film. Especially the latter is also a nice walk-around lens. The 50 mm (which I own) not so much. It's very nice for portraits, but it already feels quite narrow.
Mine just arrived, funny looking thing, a lot fatter than i expected.
35mm is definitely the ideal length for dx, i used to have the 50mm 1.8 but it was always too close for most uses.
Well worth the money.
35mm is definitely the ideal length for dx, i used to have the 50mm 1.8 but it was always too close for most uses.
Well worth the money.