Nikon 35mm f1.8 v f2

Rob_p

Rob_p

Messages
248
Edit My Images
No
Looking to sell my 50mm f1.8 as I'm hopefully going to be getting an 85m soon for portraits. I find 50mm a bit long on a cropped body, looking for something a bit wider with a fast aperture. The 35mm f1.8 seems a good choice but I've also seen few great shots from the F2 version (which also seems more expensive?)

Anyone have any experience with either of these lenses and can point me towards the better option?
 
I have the 35mm f1.8 DX and find it to be incredibly sharp. I will post up some pics tomorrow when I'm on my pc if that would help.
 
The f1.8 is a DX lens so only works on cropped bodies whereas the F2 is full frame. IF you think you'll never go full frame then the 1.8 is a fine lens.
 
Nawty said:
The f1.8 is a DX lens so only works on cropped bodies whereas the F2 is full frame. IF you think you'll never go full frame then the 1.8 is a fine lens.
Click to expand...

True but also don't forget the 1.8 can be had for about £160 new.

Paul
 
Nawty said:
The f1.8 is a DX lens so only works on cropped bodies whereas the F2 is full frame. IF you think you'll never go full frame then the 1.8 is a fine lens.
Click to expand...

Not quite, it will work on full frame with very little vignetting even at wide open f1.8.

I have one myself and it stays on the camera almost all the time. Sharp, light and inexpensive. Only problem is the somewhat high barrel distortion but easily corrected in post processing.
 
Last edited:
I love mine - so much I want to switch to portraiture!
 
The 35mm f2 will render out of focus areas smoother than the f1.8, it also has a closer minimum focusing distance.

The 35mm f2 will work on FX, the 35mm f1.8 is a DX lens.

If you have a built in focus motor in your camera body go for the 35mm f2, if not go for the 35mm f1.8.
 
If you shoot DX, get the 1.8...regardless of whether, one day (or years) down the line you intend to go to full frame.

It costs £160, you won't lose much on it, on a DX body it focuses faster and is sharper than the F2.

If you go full frame in the end, sell it, and lose £40 in depreciation (over x amount of years..). Not a big deal.

You will like it alot, I much prefer it to an 50mm 1.8 on my D200. I had the same complaint with the 50mm focal length so I bought the 35mm 1.8. Now I use the 35mm, and an 85mm 1.8 pretty much exclusively for portraiture.

Regards

Danny
 
had the 35mm 1.8 when I had a crop sensor and was in my camera most of the time incredibly sharp but had to send it to nikon as I was getting front focusing issues. bought for £150 from jessops when quidco were giving 8% quidco and sold it when I went full frame for £145. as said hardly any depreciation
 
I'd go with the 35/2 as you then have no worries if you go FX sometime in the future.

I can't really see the point in making a lens of f/1.8 as it's really only a third of a stop more than f/2 but it seems to be popular on consumer prime lenses.

I used to have the 35/2 with my old D70s body and it was superb and the bokeh was very smooth. Sample shots I've seen from the 35/1.8DX don't seem to have that same smooth bokeh.
 
I wouldn't bother with the 35/2 if you're considering full frame in future, would rather buy the 50mm 1.8 or any of the 1.4 for a full frame.
 
Here is an example taken at f2.8

5386095328_4f45dbc6e9_z.jpg
[/url][/IMG]

I will try and find some more tomorrow if that would help but you really can't go wrong with this lens at the price you can buy it for.
 
Last edited:
boliston said:
35mm is still an excellent focal length on full frame. I'd love the 35/1.4G but the 35/2 is an affordable alternative.
Click to expand...

Have to agree with all of that ... starts saving pennies for the 35/1.4G :D

To be honest Danny made sense when he said get the 35/1.8, then if the OP goes full frame he can sell and replace, without losing too much on the 35/1.8.
 
The DX 35mm f/1.8 really is scarily sharp, once stopped down a bit :(. Here are a couple of random examples from it, although Photobucket will probably make them look a bit soft:

Ferrari_01.jpg


DSC_2371_1600.jpg


The one thing that I don't like about this lens is that it does exhibit rather a lot of CA at f/1.8 or f/2, in certain conditions :(. It's not unusual when shooting any fast lens wide open into strongly contrasting light, but I have the impression that it's worse with this lens than with my other two fast primes.

As I've never tried the 35mm f/2 lens, I can't say how it compares :shrug:.
 
Thanks for everyones replies, the 1.8 is sounding good then. If I go full frame in the future I'd probably get a 50mm f1.4G as someone suggested. Purely on a DX body the 35 sounds like the one to go for and I've seen some bargains too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top