Anyone tried Nikon's 35mm f1.8 for FX?

<p>It seems to be backordered everywhere but I guess they have started to ship them?</p>

<p>Anyone used this lens?</p>

<p>Have not heard anyone getting one yet.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I got mine right after it was released at Midwest Photo in Columbus, OH. Not sure if they still have them in stock (or if you're in a location where this would be a feasible option).</p>

<p>I had been waiting for this one for a while--35mm is my favorite focal length but I have no need for f/1.4 and the 35/1.4G is huge and heavy, not to mention expensive. </p>

<p>The 35/1.8G FX is pretty typical of the new f/1.8 primes, which is a good thing. I'd say the feel of the lens is decent, not quite as nice as the 85/1.8G which seems like the most solid of the bunch, but better than the 28/1.8G which feels more hollow and has more slop in the focus ring. The 35 has a tiny bit of slop in the focus ring, but it's not too bad.</p>

<p>It's not as small as the old 35/2D, but it's not too large, it's about the same size as the Zeiss 35/2.</p>

<p>The first thing I noticed is that the lens is a bit wider than the stated 35mm. I have no way of measuring but I'd guess it's a few milimeters short. It's noticeable but strangely it still seems different enough from the 28mm to be useful for me. (I know many consider this to be a tight pairing, but I've always worked with a 28/35/50 combo.) It's something to be aware of but probably not a huge issue for many photographers. It actually might be a benefit if you shoot with a 35/50 kit, which is often what I have on my two cameras, or it might fit in better between a 24/35/50 combo. </p>

<p>The lens is pretty sharp in the center even wide open, and the extreme FX corners are much, much better than the 35/2D. The corners are a tad soft and low in contrast at f/1.8, but they sharpen up pretty quickly. I haven't done comprehensive testing but I tend to use this lens in two ways, at f/2-2.8 for more dynamic, documentary photos and at F/5.6-7.1 for landscapes. The results in both situations are very good on my D800E bodies. </p>

<p>Despite the lack of nano coating, the lens is very resistant to flare. And the distortion is not too bad, somewhat typical of lenses in this focal length. The lens has a fair amount of CA, which doesn't really clear up even at f/5.6 on high contrast edges. This is easily fixed in post, of course, but I prefer a lens with more correction of color errors.</p>

<p>Overall I'm quite satisfied with the lens. It's a solid performer and it is lightweight and relatively inexpensive. I compared it to the Zeiss 35/2 and while I really wanted to like the Zeiss (because of its high quality construction, smooth focus ring, etc.), the Nikon lens was better. It was definitely sharper at all apertures and the Nikon had a bit less CA.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It's a bit of an odd lens release this one. Very limited numbers for quite some time. </p>

<p>There's 4 left on Amazon UK...via a Amazon Partner....and there's only one review....and it's far from a happy one. Too expensive and apparently it vignettes badly.</p>

<p>We had an earlier thread on this same question almost a month ago: <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cSDo">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cSDo</a></p>

<p>I have checked with Nikon a couple of times for a review sample, but they haven't indicated that one is available. I bougth the Sigma 35mm/f1.4 late last year when Amazon had a $200 discount. The Sigma is a really great lens but heavy. Personally, I don't think I'll buy another 35mm lens for a long time to come (unless I lose or damage that Sigma).</p>

<p>Here's one review from slrgear.com. </p>

<p>http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1480</p>

<p>Thanks guys.</p>

<p>I really like the 35mm focal length as my "normal" but like my primes to be small and light weight, more than I like f/1.4. Well actually, Nikon's 50mm f1.4 is both pretty small, light weight and f1.4.</p>

<p>28mm is too wide for me, so I never bothered with the 28mm 1.8G.</p>