Nikon 35mm f/2D

Started Jun 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
87350iroc Junior Member • Posts: 43
Re: Nikon 35mm f/2D

breivogel wrote:

If you consider the 35mm f2 acceptable at f2.8, then you are only looking at the center (which may be OK in for certain shots with limited DOF) - but the border and corner sharpness will be terrible. Totally unsatisfactory for landscape use where the whole image needs to be in focus. Look at the photozone review of this lens: this issue is clearly shown on the MTF graphs.

Although this lens is available a low cost, it is not a bargain, and you will be unhappy with it long term.

Who is shooting landscapes at f2.8?  I can honestly say in my 50,000+ DSLR photos I have never done that.  If you aren't shooting landscapes, why do you care what the corners look like?  They will almost always be out of focus.  At f8 the corners are just fine in this lens.  I am a engineer and of course love stats, charts, and numbers, but IMO they have minimal use in the photo world.  If the pictures look good, I'm happy, regardless of what the charts say.

Since you have personally had such a bad experience with your 35f2 why don't you post a picture that we can look at?

IMO the 28mm f1.8 is not a suitable replacement for the following reasons

- I happen to like 35mm better

- it is 3x as expensive

- takes up double the space in my bag

 87350iroc's gear list:87350iroc's gear list
Nikon D600 Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +5 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow