Bjorn has a review of the 35mm 1.8 DX !

Started Feb 12, 2009 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
nikonshooter2 Junior Member • Posts: 40
Bjorn has a review of the 35mm 1.8 DX !

http://nikongear.com/smf/index.php?topic=14710.20

You can read the whole thread, but here's the more interesting part (Note the lens he's comparing it to is what he considers the best 35mm prime in existence; see his "best of the best" list) :

"Spent the morning shooting those boring resolution test shots with the 35/1.8 and using the 35/1.4 as a reference. In many ways an interesting comparison. The 35 is venerable and old, with a fierce temperament of its own that you have to learn in order to master. The 35/1.8 is youngish, brash, and unconcerned.

The 35/1.4 is of course sharper at f/1.4 than the newcomer. Here and up to f/2 to f/2.2, the particular veiling flare with the tinge of blue fringing around highlights, so characteristic for the 35/1.4, is much in evidence and overlies a core of image sharpness. From f/2.5 and up, the veiling vanishes to be gone by f/3.2 and very sharp image detail emerges. The 35/1.4 is not a flat-field design, but does quite well at short distances thanks to its CRC implementation. Flare and ghosting caused by strong light sources tend to be a small issue. The older lens has an endearing life-like quality of its "drawing" that I presume it is an integral part of its long history of appeal.

The 35/1.8 goes straight off at f/1.8 with a high-contrast image rendition, totally unlike the f/1.4 lens. It keeps the high contrast fairly well up to f/5.6 or so, from which setting the contrast gradually declines. Yet, even at f/22, wholly acceptable sharpness is observed. Still not a flat-field design and I have no information as to its optical design except it's a double Gauss derivation, which shows in the tendency for a mild barrel distortion (the 35/1.4 is no better, by the way). Flare is kept well under control, but shooting into the sun will provoke a few rainbow-coloured ghost spots. There is a mild tendency towards CA that is fairly evident when the lens is stopped down, but sharpness is scarcely impacted and I assume Nikon relies on the EXPEED processor to relieve the in-camera jpgs from the vestiges of CA. As this lens clearly is targeted at the volume market segment dominated by D40/40x, D60, D70, D80, D90 and similar models, shooting in-camera jpgs will likely be the prevailing approach. If you stray away from the majority and try raw files instead, Nikon is eager to stress that their NX2 software will remove CA automatically also from NEFs.

In direct A/B comparison, the 35/1.8 is sharper up to f/2.8 by virtue of having much less internal flare and better contrast, but the 35/1.4 gets the upper hand from f/4. So I'd call it a tie between them. Both are capable of delivering excellent imagery, but only the 35/1.4 can safely be used with an FX camera. The 35/1.8 DX G is not for FX use (unless you always shoot in the near range). Do not let its low price fool you into thinking the 35/1.8 G is just a toy for low-end cameras, though. This lens shows what Nikon can deliver at an unbeatable price point."

ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow