Your choice for a fast 28mm to 35mm DX lens?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by photo_galleries, Oct 25, 2017.

  1. Just curious about what people use as a fast (f.14 or f1.8) 28mm or 35mm on the DX bodies? Do you opt for fast full frame lenses on your DX body or do you use a DX lens?

    I have a bag full of fast Nikon and Sigma ART primes from 20mm to 50mm, but I'd to like pick up a smallish and not too expensive DX lens. I'll use primarily when I'm on the road with a D500, a 10-20mm and 18-140mm. I'd like a fast and smallish prime to complement that gear.

    The two that are most widely reviewed are the Nikon 35/1.8 and the Sigma 30/1.4 ART. Any others that I might have missed?

    What do you use? Again, just curious.

    -Keith
     
  2. I am mostly an FX and film user, but have DX cameras.

    IMO, there's no reason for a serious DX shooter to NOT have a 35mm 1.8 in their bag. It's a fantastic little lens that's less than $200...in fact I couldn't begin to tell you how many lenses I've both in F mount and all mounts combined(it's easily well into triple digits considering all mounts) and it's one of just a few that I've bought new.

    It's not optically perfect and I've found the bokeh at times to be a bit unpleasant, but overall it's a great small and lightweight lens.

    BTW, I weighed it against the 35mm f/2, which is one of the older lenses in Nikon's lineup. The f/2 is a full frame lens and is screwdriver focusing(preferable for me on small primes, but MF only for other people depending on the body you have) with an aperture ring(double plus for me). Ultimately, I passed on it because it was twice as expensive and 35mm isn't a full frame focal length I use that often. I get out my AI-s 35mm 1.4 for when I DO want a fast full frame 35mm prime.
     
  3. Nope, you got them all. No reason though not to consider the FX 28/1.8G too.

    I have the 35/1.8G DX but honestly can't remember the last time I actually used it. It's now in my wife's camera bag and I know for a fact that she has not mounted it once.

    For lack of use, I just sold my Sigma Art 24/1.4 and am left with the 35 and the 50, both of which I might occasionally use on a D500; they are much more at home on a D810 though.

    I disposed of all my DX lenses as I see no reason or advantage in using DX over FX for my general photography. When I want to reduce the size and weight of the bag, I pack a Sony A7II with a 12-24/4, 28/2, and 70-200/4. Haven't decided yet what to do about the mid-range gap. The 24-70/4 would be a natural choice, as would be a 40, 50 or 55mm prime.
     
  4. In the transition to 'digital' around 2006 (to DX.. D200), my beloved 24mm's became immediately sort-of obsolete.
    A 20/3.5 didn't offer a real solution, in terms of 'wide angle'..
    I find the range between 24mm and 50mm (say: 28, 35.. on FX) rather un-interesting.
    Then, I re-discovered 50mm ('70mm' on DX) ..and bought the 12-24/4.0.
    What was the question again? ..fast wide angle on DX.. To get a 24mm equivalent, 16mm is where 'wide angle' really starts, in my opinion.
    DX and wide-angle .. not a great match.
    ..I am really looking forward to buy a 20/1.8, for FX, and possibly for DX.

    On the other hand.. I do use 50mm regularly on FX nowadays. So why not a 35/1.8 on DX?

    What would answer your question effectively?
     
  5. I actually do use the 28/1.8 AFS G (and sometimes a 20/1.8 AFS G) as my fast prime for my D500, but I was wondering if there were other options. I generally don't follow what lenses are in the market unless I have a specific need so I don't really know what's 'out there' for a fast DX lens -- not a whole heck of lot, it seems like. I do have a trio of f1.4 ART lenses -- 24,35,50 -- but they do feel more at home on my D800e (and on a D850 probably some time next year).

    I also have a Sony A7R and a couple of AF lenses, as well as M-mount lenses that I adapt for that body. I use it on occasion for travel, but only when I feel like shooting IR (full spectrum conversion) and/or when I feel like taking a film rangefinder on the road -- sharing lenses allows me to shoot film and digi on the road.

    In general though, when shooting digital, I personally feel more at home when shooting my DSLRs versus the A7R. I guess for now I'll "make do" with the 28/1.8 as a fast prime for my D500.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2017
  6. FWIW, if I were to purchase a fast DX lens, I'd choose the Sigma 18-35/1.8. Rather large and heavy - but optically excellent and certainly more flexible than a prime. A wider alternative would be the Tokina 14-20/2.
     
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  7. It really doesn't sound like you'd benefit from any more lenses in this range. You already have all the classic focal lengths, and the 28mm at least is relatively light (though not that small). The 35mm DX would be lighter than anything you currently have, if that's a consideration.
     
  8. Small, light and not too expensive in that range: 35mm f/1.8 DX fits all three. When I still used a DX camera, I used this lens a fair bit, and in my view, for the money it costs, it's hard to better it.
    My favourite was an AiS 35mm f/1.4 (and on FX, it only got better to my taste), but it's a quirky lens, and not really an allrounder - the 35mm DX lens filled that role better (and has AF which can be mighty convenient too).
     
  9. Normally I concider f/2.8 to be on the fast side. But with such specific question I will answer 35mm DX Nikkor as I have nothing else that fits.
     
  10. I went down the Dieter route of the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8. It's very sharp. It's mass acts as it's own VR, it's a fairly weighty beast.

    That said it balances OK on my D7200 and D500, I tried it on a D3200 and it felt quite nose heavy. It's a long lens considering it's wide, but holding it by the far end is very stable.

    It can be used very happily wide open, but if you want uber-sharp, shut it down to f4 and pop it on a tripod
     
  11. PS. I tried the early 30mm 1.4 Sigma, ie non ART and it was truly horrid. huge coma and not very sharp anywhere. I sold it after a month of trying to get nice pix with it. I gather the ART version is better.
     
  12. I briefly tried a 30mm Art when I was trying to hunt down a 35mm (I got handed the wrong one having mis-spoken in a shop, and failed to notice on my D810 because I first tried live view, and it auto-cropped). I didn't do much of a test, but it did seem optically decent. The Art 35mm is good too, but I have a lot of trouble getting autofocus to hit unless I go for live view, even having tried the dock. I'm hoping a D850 might give me less trouble.
     
  13. I guess for me it depends on perspective. In medium format I not only consider fast but also a practical maximum. For 35mm, I'd call it fast for a zoom lens or for an exotic focal length(longer than 200mm or shorter than 24mm). Within the real of "normal" prime focal lengths for 35mm where maximum apertures between f/2 and f/1.4 are quite common, I don't consider it all that fast.
     
  14. Same experience as Mike with the early 30mm f/1.4 non-Art Sigma, hated it, regretted buying it, but took a bit longer to sell it. My 28mm f/1.8 AF-S gets shared between DX and FX.
     
  15. I was ordering a few items on Amazon when I noticed that the price on the 35/1.8 DX just went down from $200 to $167. Needless to say, I added it to my cart and should get it in a couple of days.
     

Share This Page