DSLRUsers.com

Hi guys

I was looking in the camera bag the other day & saw my poor 50mm lens sitting there & tried to think of the last time it came out of the bag. Then I remembered back to when I had a 35mm f/2 & how it almost never came off the camera.

So on the subject of the 35mm lens. Is the new 1.8 version an improvement over the f/2, any faults to look out for . I read a review in a mag the otherday & it didn't get glowing reviews, but they didn't say avoid the lens either.
I know it isn't a full frame lens, but I'm not going full frame anytime soon.
Has anyone here had both
Does anyone have the 1.8 & would like to tell me how great it is

Appreciate comments

I have had no experience with the 1.8, but the same experience with the f/2. It is permanently fixed to my D80 and the 50 f/1.8 is sold - I just never used it once I got the 35... I will be going FF later this year (NYC and B+H here I come!)

From my brief usage of both, I like the new 35mm f1.8 better.

It's sharp on the corners as well and you can use it on full frame cameras, you'll see slight vignetting wide open, which is also gradual vignetting instead of bold dark corners. Stopping it down is another story altogether, you'll see bold dark corners when you stop it down.

Focusing should be slower than the 35mm f2 though.

Grev wrote:From my brief usage of both, I like the new 35mm f1.8 better.

It's sharp on the corners as well and you can use it on full frame cameras, you'll see slight vignetting wide open, which is also gradual vignetting instead of bold dark corners. Stopping it down is another story altogether, you'll see bold dark corners when you stop it down.

Focusing should be slower than the 35mm f2 though.

Can you really use the 1.8 DX on a FX camera? Do you have any shots to show us??? It really does seem like the new AF-S primes are slow to focus if the AF-D are outpaceing them...

aim54x wrote:Can you really use the 1.8 DX on a FX camera? Do you have any shots to show us??? It really does seem like the new AF-S primes are slow to focus if the AF-D are outpaceing them...

Yes you really can use it on the full frame cameras. I don't have shots personally since I don't own the lens but if you google it, you should be able to find some photos.

And as I said, you will get gradual vignetting if you're using it wide open to about f4, beyond that, you'll get very bold circular outlines. The sample that I tried at f11 showed that the lens isn't centred either.

But I am quite surprised at the results at the wider apertures, since I didn't see pronounced softness (like the AFS 70-200mm) at the corners.

Thanks for the responses guys, not many 35mm users around then

DJT wrote:So on the subject of the 35mm lens. Is the new 1.8 version an improvement over the f/2

Being the first dx prime lens, I'm not sure that the comparison you're suggesting is reasonable: this is a whole new realm in terms of Nikon glass.

In our testing of this lens, it was just a perfect match for the dx bodies. Once it was mounted on the D60, it just refused to allow itself to be removed.

It is very well targeted in those terms, and image quality, speed of use, etc were more than satisfactory. Very good glass, very good value.

yep makes sense Gary, reckon I'll just do what it takes to get my hands on the 1.8

Oh yeah, I tried it again on the D700, the vignetting problem don't get bold (pun intended) until you go beyond f5.6, so pretty much can use it normally without feeling guilty on full frame, not to mention on a DX camera.

Buy it!

Oh yeah, this is a great test I found, which sums up my findings as well. http://www.camwk.com/showthread.php?t=222

Pretty much an amazing lens for the money.

I see on the Van Bar web site it is for sale at $363 only about $30 more than grey import !!
28 2.8 is $368 at VB atm would this be better for street or the faster 35 !

the 35 is normal on a DX sensor...the 28 is a bit wider...I would go the 28 if it were me

lightning wrote:I see on the Van Bar web site it is for sale at $363 only about $30 more than grey import !!
28 2.8 is $368 at VB atm would this be better for street or the faster 35 !

What body will you be using this on?

On a DX body, think of the 35mm DX lens as being its "normal" lens. Accordingly, the crop factor makes this about the equivalent of 52mm in traditional 35mm camera terms, and thus it gives you angles of view that roughly equate to that which the human eye sees. It would be somewhat misleading to think of this lens as being a wide angle lens in this context.

If you're wanting to go wide angle, then, for a DX body, probably better to go for something like a 24mm or wider.

For street shooting, I find that wider is better, but that also depends upon might call street shooting, and what you might be shooting on your streets.

It's on a d80,
I have a 50mm 1.4g (75mm after crop factor) bought more for portraits. I was in one of Melbournes lane ways, a band was jammed into the corner thumping away lots of activity. I use a wireless remote so that I don't have to have the camera at eye level. when i got to the computer I found I had cut the drummers head off ! buggar !

The 20 & 24 are out of my budget, but i may have a case with the finance minister for the 28 or 35 !

I would guess that if you have only cut his head off 35mm will be fine, but 28mm would give a bit more room.
I also think 24mm would be grouse, but 20mm would be better if only I had the available funds. PS. still waitin for my 35mm. I tried , but got , i guess that's a no for now


So good luck with your grovelling

aim54x wrote:
Can you really use the 1.8 DX on a FX camera? Do you have any shots to show us??? It really does seem like the new AF-S primes are slow to focus if the AF-D are outpacing them...

@f2 on d700. the 35DX is horrifically slow, my old 35/2 smokes it for AF. but it is super quiet and as you can see from these shots, sharp as a tack.