Indeed.
Let the people, who want flexibility to take both image and video, go to mirrorless (e.g. Nikon 1)
AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G FX thread
- Thread starter jeff7id
- Start date
Indeed.
Let the people, who want flexibility to take both image and video, go to mirrorless (e.g. Nikon 1)
the world first review from Ken Rockwell:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35mm-f18-fx.htm
"
As all AF lenses, it won't focus in dimmer light or any faster than slower (f/2.8 or f/4) AF lenses; Nikon's AF system doesn't care about lens speed
I can't see any coma in this aspherical lens.
Falloff on FX and 35mm is visible at f/1.8 and f/2, and gone by f/2.8. With cameras that offer vignette correction, falloff is only minor even at f/1.8. "
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35mm-f18-fx.htm
"
As all AF lenses, it won't focus in dimmer light or any faster than slower (f/2.8 or f/4) AF lenses; Nikon's AF system doesn't care about lens speed
I can't see any coma in this aspherical lens.
Falloff on FX and 35mm is visible at f/1.8 and f/2, and gone by f/2.8. With cameras that offer vignette correction, falloff is only minor even at f/1.8. "
Last edited:
The price of the new 35mm f1.8 G FX has to go down, hopefully ard 500 bucks range. If it stays at the 700 bucks range, Nikon would prob have a technical success but marketing failure with this lens. Come to think of it, who would buy a $700 f1.8 when u can get a f1.4 lens from Sigma for ard $200 more?
The 85mm f1.8g is around $600, don't think the 35mm f1.8 FX will go lower than that. If the 35mm performance is same as the 85mm, then its on my immediate buy list
Support. :thumbsup:
Agreed. He can't produce any photos like the other lenses he reviewed on and I think he made the "specs" by guessing, press releases and looking at the picture? And did anyone realise he had a """""left handed"""""" F100? note the inverted commas hahahahahah.
"As all AF lenses, it won't focus in dimmer light (...)"
Of course!
Not that I'm in the habit of agreeing with Mr Rockwell but I think what he's trying to say (albeit poorly worded) is the faster max aperture doesn't affect how well it focuses. The threshold is f5.6 (and more recently f8 on some cameras), whilst Canon do have some models that take advantage of f2.8 or faster lenses but increasing the max aperture on a lens doesn't make it focus better or faster in dim light or otherwise.
The minimum EV the AF works is determined by the AF module in the camera regardless of the lens in front of it as long as the lens meets the minimum aperture threshold (f5.6 or f8 depending on the camera model and which AF point).
The second review of Nikon 35 f/1.8G FX is out !!
Http://camera.itmedia.co.jp/dc/spv/1401/24/news037.html
I said second, because the world first review by Ken Rockwell was already posted 2 weeks ago before this review.
Http://camera.itmedia.co.jp/dc/spv/1401/24/news037.html
I said second, because the world first review by Ken Rockwell was already posted 2 weeks ago before this review.
This guy is confusing. Is it 58mm or 67 mm filter thread?! Makes me doubt he actually has one of these.
If performance of this lens look like its brother AF-s 35 f/1.8 DX then I will get this lens as well.
Just a thought, the DX version almost covers FX, maximum de-vignetting can't remove vignette completely. It's like 14 mp on the D4 if cropped. Haven't evaluated the corner performance of the little DX fellow though.
What I like from AF-s Nikon 35mm f/1.8G FX that this is a small (in term of diameter), short (in term of physical length), auto focus, light weight, and a full frame lens ("should be" less vignetting & sharper in the corner on FX body), which fulfill my needs of walk-around and everyday lenses, together with the 50mm f/1.8G SE lens.
35 f/1.8 50 f/1.8
:vhappy: :vhappy:
35 f/1.8 50 f/1.8
:vhappy: :vhappy:
Last edited:
Similar threads
