Convince me the 35 1.4 G is better than the 35 1.8 DX on FX!

Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,552
Location
Los Angeles, USA
My favorite walk around lens lately has been my 35 1.8 DX on an FX body. It's the first Nikkor small prime I feel comfortable shooting wide open all the time with fast and accurate focus. On top of that it's dirt cheap and I feel is a better lens than the 35 f/2 AF-D it replaced. So with that in mind, is the 35 1.4 G worth it? I have top Nikkor lenses in my lineup and in comparison, I think it's right up there with my best glass. Vignetting, bokeh and corner sharpness don't bother me. Center sharpness, fast focus and wide-open performance with no CA seem to be the 35 1.8's strengths.

For those with the 35 1.4 G, is there any real world scenarios where the 35 1.8 would not be up-to-par? Samples welcomed!
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
227
Location
Seattle
Using the 35/1.8 DX lens on a full frame body? Doesn't it vignette heavily at distances greater than several feet? (Also when stopped down?)

But I guess if you are happy with it then go ahead, it is $200 vs $1800, so that is a big difference. I've never actually used the 35/1.8G so I can't really say. If I had to guess the 35/1.4G is as good if not better at f1.8 without the vignetting issue.

I believe on nikongear.com there is a discussion thread comparing the image characteristics (such as bokeh rendering) between the 1.8G and the 1.4G.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
249
Location
Virginia
I had a 35 1.8 before and the AF was pretty slow IMO. Center Sharpness was indeed good however, I think camera labs came out with a test showing it was actually sharper than the 35 1.4G @. 1.8. I didn't like the heavy vignette however, and to some people shooting @ 1.4 is essential. if cost is not an issue and those extra stop of light is important and hate the vignette that's comes with 35 1.8, I don't see why anyone wouldn't want a 35 specially made for FX formats.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
4,043
Location
Missouri
I have to be honest, there are things I like better about the 1.8 (less distortion, faster focus speed), which really ticks me off, considering the price of the new 1.4. However, the 1.4 is the better lens if you're using it @ ƒ2 and want the smoothest bokeh.

The question you're asking is if it's $1600 better, and my personal answer is a resounding "absolutely not".
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,552
Location
Los Angeles, USA
I have to be honest, there are things I like better about the 1.8 (less distortion, faster focus speed), which really ticks me off, considering the price of the new 1.4. However, the 1.4 is the better lens if you're using it @ ƒ2 and want the smoothest bokeh.

The question you're asking is if it's $1600 better, and my personal answer is a resounding "absolutely not".

The thing is, I'm not really a big fan of close-up bokeh, and prefer the subject/background isolation of fast telephoto glass. Even my 85 1.4 G feels a tad choppy to me. Nothing beats fast telephoto lens bokeh in my opinion!
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
5,324
Location
New Mexico
I use the CV 40 f2, wide open all day/night long FX/DX...makes the 35 f1.8 look/feel like garbage.
Haven't tried on a 35 f1.4G (something about the price) :eek: but if someone was
to loan me one, I'd have more to say on the subject. Carry on...:biggrin:
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,552
Location
Los Angeles, USA
I use the CV 40 f2, wide open all day/night long FX/DX...makes the 35 f1.8 look/feel like garbage.
Haven't tried on a 35 f1.4G (something about the price) :eek: but if someone was
to loan me one, I'd have more to say on the subject. Carry on...:biggrin:

I was looking at the Voigtlander 40 f/2 at one point...post some FX samples!
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,969
Location
Chicago
I checked yesterday on my D3 using full sensor. Corners at 200 feet , 4.0 and 5.6, are reasonably sharp. The issue is vignetting the last 10/15% from center to corner. I could not remove it using the vignetting controls in ACR 6.4.

I put it back on the D7000 which is what I bought it for. Lovely lens on that camera.

The F2.0 AF has lousy corners to 8.0.

So now I am trying to decide if 35 1.4 or 24/70 2.8 should be bought. The 1.4 is large, but not to heavy. The zoom is like carrying a tank. Chances are I will get a 1.4.

I hope I convinced you. I just don`t use 35 mm at 18 inches so just because some say it works there does not impress me.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,552
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Here is the link to the page I mentioned that directly compares the 35/1.4G vs the 35/1.8G on a D3:

http://nikongear.com/live/index.php...arethe-18-and-the-14-and-their-oof-rendering/

It's interesting, I'm looking at it right now...

From those samples, with close range shooting the 35 1.8 looks to have better bokeh! I also like the fact I can use cheapo 52mm close-up filters on the 35 1.8!

Here are my recent 35 1.8 DX samples on FX:

hendrix_04.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


hendrix_01.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3518_15.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3518_19.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3518_21.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
227
Location
Seattle
From those samples, with close range shooting the 35 1.8 looks to have better bokeh! I also like the fact I can use cheapo 52mm close-up filters on the 35 1.8!

That's an interesting take. I see that the 35/1.4G renders the circular OOF highlights as well - more circular and even. Also generally "more" out of focus - and that's at f1.8 - at f1.4 I imagine the difference would be greater. Those are all very close-up shots though. At slightly more normal or distant working distances it might be different.

I see that in your lens arsenal you have a lot of overlapping coverage for 35mm (the 16-35/f4 and the 24-70/f2.8) so it makes sense that a 35/1.8 DX be in that line-up especially if only used at closer distances and wide open.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
538
Location
Boise, ID
Jonathan, I would have to completely agree with you. I was never thrilled with the 35dx on my D2x, but on my Kodak, its awesome. The vignette doesn't really bother me, and for $200 its fantastic.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
460
Location
Hertfordshire, England
Rose from my garden with D3s shot with 35/1.4 wide open

5746846937_ca19329304_b.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
1,199
Location
USA
How far away does the subject have to be before the image starts falling apart with vignetting, soft corners, etc.?
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom