AF-S 35mm f/1.4G Nano

[2100]

Sharpness-wise, as I used Sigma 50mm and Nikon 24-70mm before, I would expect 35mm f1.4 to be at least on par with one of those. Well, maybe not with 24-70, but at least the sharpness should be on par with Sigma 50mm considering 35mm price tag is this high.

I'll pay a visit to NSC later today, see what they say

Perhaps you can play with a bit of the AF fine-tune? But it doesn't matter with a subj which is somewhat slowly slanting or an image with points having various distances in it, coz then something would still be in focus.

To be fair to the 24G and 35G, a good copy Sigma 50/1.4 wide open is really good, just a wee bit of haloing at 100% that's all (and that is with a 21M 5DII image). Seriously with a Bayer filter cam (as opposed to Foveon tech) you don't really use it at 100% anyway, need to downsize a bit.
I was looking at a comparison, IMO it can hang out with a Canon 50/1.2 L. Even my 24G from my best images and on the net images wide open it is just somewhat better.
You are paying a lot for the Nano-coat tech, its not easy to do, so see if you really have use for it.
The Sigma 50/1.4 is pretty under-rated, it could have been much better if the local prices are as good as overseas. (but people have real use for it, so local dealers know that quite a number will pay)

Again, different people have different expectations. Last time couple of years ago my expectations were like what we see here.....actually just a bit of blurness also cannot accept and I will fret like there's no tomorrow.

PS. My Sigma 17-50 @ 2.8 is also significantly sharper in the middle and mid-frame than the 24G at 1.4. The Sigma also has much less CA at 17mm 2.8 than the 24G. 24G stopped down, it goes away. All in all, not a problem for my use, but for pre-wedding where they blow to near A3 sizes and the nature of subjects/background/highlights it might be an issue (don't think the pre-wedding crowd would use this anyway). But then some people do both, and usually they use whatever is available to them as a tool. Just standard, all in a day's work. Some have a problem with that, some don't. So not surprised about your N24-70.

 

[kentwong81]

It's not wise to compare the lenses at different aperture numbers. At f1.4, the depth of field is not as much as f2.8, and hence the sharpness of the subject is not as good as at f2.8. You should stop down to f2.8 to compare both lenses.
But the 24 and 35 can do something that 24-70 f2.8 can't at f1.4. You should know it well. That's why you bought 24 f1.4G.

PS. My Sigma 17-50 @ 2.8 is also significantly sharper in the middle and mid-frame than the 24G at 1.4. The Sigma also has much less CA at 17mm 2.8 than the 24G. 24G stopped down, it goes away. All in all, not a problem for my use, but for pre-wedding where they blow to near A3 sizes and the nature of subjects/background/highlights it might be an issue (don't think the pre-wedding crowd would use this anyway). But then some people do both, and usually they use whatever is available to them as a tool. Just standard, all in a day's work. Some have a problem with that, some don't. So not surprised about your N24-70.

 

[ZeroDivine]

still no sample pics from those who've bought this lens?

 

[amachi]

Just came back from NSC. While I was there, I tried their copy of 35mm also. Well, seems like mine is fine. The less-sharp stuff that I felt is maybe because my expectation is high for this lens, and the NSC technician also agrees that if compared to 24mm, 35mm is less sharp wide open.

Will try to post something tonight when I am back home

 

[Hacker]

I tested my lens and the pictures are very sharp, even at the edges. But AF is slower than the 24 f/1.4.

 

[amachi]

I tested my lens and the pictures are very sharp, even at the edges. But AF is slower than the 24 f/1.4.

Maybe our interpretation of sharpness is on different level hehe.

Well, I am kind of a fussy person when it comes to this :bsmilie:

 

[kentwong81]

Just share some of my photos taken handheld using the 35 and 24 at wide open f1.4. Pardon me if they are not the professional portraits shoots you expect for this lens.

#1 35mm f1.4, ISO200, 1/160s

#2 35mm f1.4, ISO200, 1/320s

#3 35mm f1.4, ISO200, 1/100s

#4 24mm f1.4, ISO200, 1/1250s

#5 24mm f1.4, ISO200, 1/25s

 

[amachi]

@kentwong81: bro, those test shots are amazing

 

[mogwai]

hi kentwong81

thanks for the pics.

i think what's evident is that if one prefers a more 'wow' perspective, then the 24/1.4 is certainly the pick. however, i'd still prefer the 35/1.4 for 'general' use and travel.

although, i'm really tempted to get a 24/1.4 to for events, special occasions and some 'wow' fun.

but i pity my pocket already. i now officially have too many 50mm and 35mm lenses....

 

[blueweed]

nice shots, very contrasty!

 

[kentwong81]

hi thanks guys. I think these new Nikon prime lenses do help a lot by making the photoshooting easier. Each of them has their own purpose and characteristics. Too bad they are very expensive. Just managed to own the 35mm.

@kentwong81: bro, those test shots are amazing

hi kentwong81

thanks for the pics.

i think what's evident is that if one prefers a more 'wow' perspective, then the 24/1.4 is certainly the pick. however, i'd still prefer the 35/1.4 for 'general' use and travel.

although, i'm really tempted to get a 24/1.4 to for events, special occasions and some 'wow' fun.

but i pity my pocket already. i now officially have too many 50mm and 35mm lenses....

nice shots, very contrasty!

 

[Numnumball]

I tested my lens and the pictures are very sharp, even at the edges. But AF is slower than the 24 f/1.4.

My copy seems the same as well.. AF undoubtely slower but accurate! it way exceed my expectations of it.. will play with it more over the weekend and post some sample pics if possible.

All i hv nw is only a test shot of my wife at the shop before i made the purchase

D700 with AFS 35mm f1.4, Shot in Jpeg wide open (unedited only skin softening done)

 

[nightwolf75]

My copy seems the same as well.. AF undoubtely slower but accurate! it way exceed my expectations of it.. will play with it more over the weekend and post some sample pics if possible.

All i hv nw is only a test shot of my wife at the shop before i made the purchase

D700 with AFS 35mm f1.4, Shot in Jpeg wide open (unedited only skin softening done)

omg.... :heart::heart::heart: (the bokeh and sharpness, not ur wife hor... :sweat

 

[kimurastanley]

My copy seems the same as well.. AF undoubtely slower but accurate! it way exceed my expectations of it.. will play with it more over the weekend and post some sample pics if possible.

All i hv nw is only a test shot of my wife at the shop before i made the purchase

D700 with AFS 35mm f1.4, Shot in Jpeg wide open (unedited only skin softening done)

the bokeh is so nice!!

 

[Numnumball]

omg.... :heart::heart::heart: (the bokeh and sharpness, not ur wife hor... :sweat

Muhaaaa.. For a moment Tot u harbor evil thots on a preggie mum to be :angry:

Think its a great buy... So BBB!!! Lol!!!

 

[Numnumball]

the bokeh is so nice!!

Wad can I say!? BBB! :bsmilie:

 

[2100]

It's not wise to compare the lenses at different aperture numbers. At f1.4, the depth of field is not as much as f2.8, and hence the sharpness of the subject is not as good as at f2.8. You should stop down to f2.8 to compare both lenses.
But the 24 and 35 can do something that 24-70 f2.8 can't at f1.4. You should know it well. That's why you bought 24 f1.4G.

For me I view that it is not super critical to compare at same apertures.....since one is a zoom and the other is a prime. Its already a Durian vs Birds Nest comparison in the first place, the shooter himself decides if the comparison is of any use, and of coz don't lose sleep over it. (i'd agree its pretty easy to sucuumb to that if one does not earn much). Have fun doing handhelds over the weekend, I suspect most will be playing in Orchard for the lights. Who needs tripods man......

 

[2100]

I tested my lens and the pictures are very sharp, even at the edges. But AF is slower than the 24 f/1.4.

We need full-res pix at the Orchard lightup! ;p Hmm....that means its prob ard 50G AF speed.

 

[nightwolf75]

Muhaaaa.. For a moment Tot u harbor evil thots on a preggie mum to be :angry:

Think its a great buy... So BBB!!! Lol!!!

oooo... pregnant? congrats!

no wonder you bought the 35... nice for baby photos. :heart:

 

[soeypixels]

My copy seems the same as well.. AF undoubtely slower but accurate! it way exceed my expectations of it.. will play with it more over the weekend and post some sample pics if possible.

All i hv nw is only a test shot of my wife at the shop before i made the purchase

D700 with AFS 35mm f1.4, Shot in Jpeg wide open (unedited only skin softening done)

:thumbsup: so creamyy
how much u bought ?

focus not fast need to get D3 liao ahhaah