Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX

[roman_thorn1]

<p>Hey folks! I know this lens is reletively inexpensive but is it worth the money. I really need a fast wide prime...wish this was wider. For now I have been using my 28 2.8 AIs, unfortunatley MF on a D300 with moving subjects is difficult. Any gripes with the 35 I should be aware of. I might order one today from Adorama...seems to be in stock. I can get it here in Canada but I have to pay a sizable premium.</p>

[niccoury]

<p>most all of the primes are just fine.</p>

<p>the 35 f/1.8 is small, fast, sharp and contrast-y. it has the same reputation as the 50 f/1.8D.</p>

<p>can't go wrong.</p>

[retread]

<p>Ditto what Nic said. The only other thing you might consider is the possibility of going full frame at some point in the future. The 35 2D might be worth a look.<br>

Will</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Consider the Sigma 30/1.4 HSM. More money. A bit larger. A bit faster. But it's built with wide-open shooting in mind. Sharper across the frame when used that way, and less CA and distortion than the 35/1.8. Also has much, much nicer looking bokeh. But then, it should for close to twice the price. The main issue, though: an extra 5mm wider - which you surely do notice.</p>

[Two23]

<p>The Sigma 30mm f1.4 is wider and is a better lens. Pro grade vs. consumer grade.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>Sigma offers three other fast AF primes at f1.8: 20mm, 24mm and 28mm. I have the 24mm/f1.8 and so far I am very pleased with the output. You should take a look at these options. Keep in mind that all are FX lenses...</p>

[Jim_Tardio]

<p>The only issue I have with my 35/1.8 is that it's a bit prone to flare. My 35/2 is much better in this regard.</p>

[arthuryeo]

<p>It is light, optically superb and well worth the price. Resolution is higher than the old 35mm/2 AFD.</p>

 

[eric_arnold]

<p>it's definitely worth $200. just as sharp as the sigma, but not as fast and with crappier bokeh.</p>

<p> </p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>Due to the crop factor 35mm is not wideangle. As Mihai mentioned Sigma makes a 20mm, 24mm, and 28mm f/1.8 lenses. Adorama has the 20mm for $519, the 24mm for $449, and the 28mm for $349. You could probably get a good used one for less. As for the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 it's a very good lens and a real bargain at around $200. I have one and I like it.</p>

<p>The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is also worth considering.</p>

[david_klaffenbach]

<p>I have the Sigma 30/1.4 but would probably have chosen the Nikon if it had been out when I made the purchase. I like the lower cost, smaller size and lighter weight of the Nikon. I also have a little less repeatable focus with the Sigma than with my Nikkors and Nikkors hold their value better. The Sigma definitely gets soft everywhere but the center when wide-open but is still quite useful. The paint is peeling on my 30/1.4 (and not on my 20 year old Nikon 180/2.8) so I'm a little disappointed in the Sigma quality, at least on the aesthetics.<br>

Pros for the Sigma: a little wider, a little faster, focus distance scale<br>

Pros for the Nikkor: half the cost, smaller, lighter</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I woiuld probably look at the Nikkor 35mm f2 Af or the Sigma 30mm f1.4.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>It's my most used lens since I got it.</p>

[rwreich]

<p>I have the Nikon 35mm 1.8 DX and I have to say that while I find this lens indispensable on my budget, I do have a few issues.<br>

First, the AF-S seems to suffer from a split second of lag from the time that I press the trigger until it actually begins to move. Once it does move, it's relatively quick.<br>

Second, I have noticed that the chromatic aberration on this lens is pretty noticeable on low aperture shots. Yes, it can be corrected in PS, but usually that correction is a trade-off with other kinds of fringing.<br>

Lastly, and this is a small one... I think the lens cap fits terribly. Yes, I know how to attach a cap, but this one doesn't seem as secure as other lenses that I have used in the past. It just feels like it's not quite settled in the grooves.</p>

<p>On the plus side, This lens really is pretty sharp in most conditions and I think that a reasonable expectation of sharpness is based on the capability of the in camera auto-focus system. The one on the D300 is supposed to be very good, so you'll probably have better luck than I usually do with moving subjects (my 2-year-old son, mainly)</p>

<p>Only other thing - the Sigma 30mm 1.4 HSM is wider, obviously so that might sway you.</p>

[j_w13]

<p>There is some quality control problems with the Sigma 1.4. The one I had consistently gave +1 stop overexposure. I've heard other users had this issue as well.</p>

[User_1891539]

<p>How fast and how wide do you really need? Nikon 20mm, 24mm and 28mm AF lenses are still available, either new or used. Admittedly, non are f1.8. If you like the results of the lense you have now, just buy the AF version. The 24mm f2.8 is excellent from my experience.</p>

[vetterhome1]

35/1.8 is sharp. Use it when I need a small and fast lens: but high chromatic aberration on this lens and distortion too. http://joergvetter.oyla.de/cgi-bin/hpm_homepage.cgi BR Joerg

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>There is some quality control problems with the Sigma 1.4. The one I had consistently gave +1 stop overexposure. I've heard other users had this issue as well.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>this isn't really a QC issue per se, but more a by-product of optimizing the lens for low-light shooting at max apertures, which means it tends to overexpose in bright sunlight. some other fast primes have this issue too, like the 58mm MF Voigtlander. mine overexposes more in the +0.3 - +0.7 range on a D300. the amount of overexposure might vary depending on what body you use it on. it's a little annoying, but once you know about it, you just have to compensate accordingly with the Exp Comp button and remember to change the settings if you switch out lenses. if you're really concerned, sigma will recalibrate it for you for use on a specific body, which i havent had done because i use two different bodies with it.</p>

 

[pictureted]

<p>I bought the 35/1.8 when it first came out and love the lens. A lot of concensus about its merits. I also like that it focuses to 1 ft.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>I have this lens. As an old standard prime lens user from way back, I love it in every way (I even like the plastic build when I compare with the kit zooms). However, there is one drawback you should be aware of. It took all of one test shot with it after I got home to notice that it has lens curvature which is very obvious if you have straight lines away from the centre. Defintitely not what one would expect from a prime standard lens when these things still mattered.</p>

<p>Now, I realize that Nikon probably intended this as a known trade-off to be automatically corrected by the digital cameras the lens will be attached to, but it won't help people like me who have a camera which can't do this. Keep in mind that no matter whether shooting JPEGs or raws, you can't correct for lens distortion in the software supplied with the cameras (ViewNX 2). If lens distortion is not built-into your camera, you need to buy Capture NX2 or use third party software (and what I've seen so far doesn't do it automatically for this lens).</p>

<p>If I were you, before buying it, I would make sure the camera you have does lens correction automatically. I'm considering returning it for this reason alone... because I like my pictures usable straight from the camera.</p>

<p>P.S. I bought it on the basis of reviews which said the lens curvature distortion was only something like 1.7 percent or whatever (just by memory). Well, now I know for myself that this is pretty significant distortion even if the number seems small.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>Now that I've realized we're into January 2011 now and not 2010, please allow me to put closure on my previous post by saying I've decided conclusively to keep this lens. Having a 1.8 lens at the maximum price I can afford (Christmas gift money) puts me back into the ballgame I had to leave when I sold my little Canon S90 to get a DSLR (severely limited by the slow kit zoom). For what I do, learned during years of using 50mm standard lenses on real film SLRs, there is no substitute for fast glass. If I have to accept a bit of barrel distortion, it's just as correctable in software as that produced by the S90 was.</p>