My Nikkor AF-S 35mm/F1.8 G DX unboxing

[mogwai]

Hi guys,

Do read up on Joe McNally, he changed the world of portraiture by using wide angle lens. So who says Wide angle is not suitable for portrait?hahha :bsmilie:

Anyway, Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8 is really a good buy at such a cost.

Will be getting mine soon



Cheers! :cheers:

Please be reminded that the 35mm (52.5 on nikon DX bodies) is not a wide angle anymore.

However, since it does provide a 52.5mm-equivalent field of view, it fits nicely into the role of a traditional half-body length portrait lens.

I agree it's a good buy nonetheless. Although the pricing could have been closer to the 50/1.8, e.g. low 300 or high 200.

 

[gollum]

i think the high barrel distortion will make it a less suitable portrait lens then say the 35f2 or the 50 1.8.

but who cares..im getting one

 

[xander5480]

COOOL~
NICEEE~
my next aim!

 

[ChongK]

Please be reminded that the 35mm (52.5 on nikon DX bodies) is not a wide angle anymore.

However, since it does provide a 52.5mm-equivalent field of view, it fits nicely into the role of a traditional half-body length portrait lens.

I agree it's a good buy nonetheless. Although the pricing could have been closer to the 50/1.8, e.g. low 300 or high 200.

Hmm yes 52.5mm-equivalent field of view is not wide anymore. But its cosidered "wide" compared to the 100mm and above that many use to take portraits. But thats what i feel only

The choice is yours. :thumbsup:

 

[Ansel]

Interesting concept, but it is so much bigger compared with the 50mm. Probably due to the AF-S motor.

Nice toy.

 

[ctm1968]

sorry to ask this question.....maybe some other bro have already asked b4.....

Can this lens work with D60?

Thanks!

 

[gnohz]

Yes sure

 

[gnohz]

Just read in some review that the CA for this lens is more than 18-55 VR at smaller aperture. 1.8 to around 2.8 is still ok though.

 

[ctm1968]

Just want to share.. Got mine at the IT Show for S$399.

taking this photo did u use flash?

 

[rotisiao]

Just read in some review that the CA for this lens is more than 18-55 VR at smaller aperture. 1.8 to around 2.8 is still ok though.

yea..used it for a photoshoot.. most significant problem i can see for this lens is the CA and colour fringing issues. It is sharp though, sharper than the 35mm f2.

notice the "stuff" words at the background. colour fringing and ca is most obvious from f1.8-f2.8 but still visible even up to f8.

d700 with 35mm f2 and my d80 with 35mm f1.8. Physically it is also larger than the 35mm f2. Especially with the hood on.
(credit to redsun for picture)

 

[gnohz]

yea..used it for a photoshoot.. most significant problem i can see for this lens is the CA and colour fringing issues. It is sharp though, sharper than the 35mm f2.

notice the "stuff" words at the background. colour fringing and ca is most obvious from f1.8-f2.8 but still visible even up to f8.

Oh, so it's worst at 1.8-2.8? :sweat:
From this review, it shows that ca is the lowest from 1.8 to around 2.2. From 2.2 it starts to increase and stays constant all the way to f22...:cry:
What a pity...
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/page3.asp

Is there anyway to reduce ca? For eg, shoot in places with low contrast like indoors etc?

 

[Nikon D40]

I'm very impressed with this lens after reading the test result from dpreview. It is even sharper than 50mm 1.8. Although the colour fringe is the most significant problem, I think photoshop can correct it.

 

[lsisaxon]

Interesting concept, but it is so much bigger compared with the 50mm. Probably due to the AF-S motor.

Nice toy.

I think might be due more to the optical formula rather than the AF-S motor.

 

[bigpond]

Thought of getting this lens but dpreview's test of this lens is not all rosy -- eg, distortion and CA on the high side. For those who are interested in the more traditional design 35/f2, the price has gone up a lot recently. Used to be about $500, but I was at John 3:16 today and was quoted $580 for it, vs $350 for the DX version (new stock arriving next week, i was told). $230 difference between these 2 lenses - food for thought...

 

[Ansel]

I think might be due more to the optical formula rather than the AF-S motor.

Can't seem to find the optical formula anywhere on the net. You got any link?

 

[Hexlord]

rotisiao -> The result look good though, and yes it does look sharp

 

[whkoh]

Can't seem to find the optical formula anywhere on the net. You got any link?

8 elements in 6 groups (1 aspheric)
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_35mmf_18g/index.htm

 

[Ansel]

8 elements in 6 groups (1 aspheric)
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_35mmf_18g/index.htm

Woo..good. Thanks

 

[erictan8888]

looks good... got to go try the lens already....

 

[pcool]

Testing the sharpness of this len on a housefly....