difference between AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G DX/FX and AF-S 35MM 1.8DX

[Sean Richard]

I was looking at a these to lenses. the f1.4 is listed as a wide angle lens but the f1.8 is listed as normal fixed lens. Beginner question but Seeing as there both 35mm what is the difference?

 

[MikeInIndy]

On FX 35mm would be a wide angle, on DX 35mm is the same field of view as a 52mm (iirc) lens, which would be a normal field of view. Obviously using the 1.4 lens on a DX camera would yield the same field of view as the DX only lens, but they class most of them by their intended use, which the 1.4 is really aimed at FX users.
--
-Mike

 

[Sean Richard]

so either one would act the same on a dx body, they just label the fx one as wide because of the full frame sensor?

 

[Robert Mifsud]

Yes, right.

 

[CHollowell]

Another difference is that the 35 f/1.8 DX doesn't quite (almost, but not quite) cover the FX frame.

 

[OSAM]

Oddly, many resellers do mark the 35/1.8 as a "wide angle" lens. I know Futureshop does.

 

[Bjorn_L]

Another difference is that the 35 f/1.8 DX doesn't quite (almost, but not quite) cover the FX frame.

Also. the DX lens is brilliant for the price. The FX lens is just plain brilliant, but painfully priced.
--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

 

[Bjorn_L]

Oddly, many resellers do mark the 35/1.8 as a "wide angle" lens. I know Futureshop does.

Well futureshop is not a camera store. They probably sell more fridges than they do cameras.
--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

 

[OSAM]

Oddly, many resellers do mark the 35/1.8 as a "wide angle" lens. I know Futureshop does.

Well futureshop is not a camera store. They probably sell more fridges than they do cameras.
--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

Henrys lists Sony's 35/1.8 as "wide-angle".

Adorama lists the same Sony 35/1.8 as "wide angle". They also list the Nikon 35/1.8DX as "wide angle".
KEH lists the Nikon 35/1.8 as "wide angle"

Checkmate.

 

[nirvana0001]

Anything below 50mm is wide, how camera sensor interpret the view angle is another question.

Oddly, many resellers do mark the 35/1.8 as a "wide angle" lens. I know Futureshop does.

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

Anything below 50mm is wide,

The normal definition of wide is a lens having a focal length wider than the diagonal of the format it is intended to be used on.

The format sizes for medium format are around 80mm (depending on which medium format), 45mm for FX and 35mm for DX.

Therefore 35mm is a "normal" angle of view on DX in much the same way as around 50mm is a normal angle of view on FX.

The 35mm f1.4 G has similar DX corner performance (15mm out) to the 35mm f1.8, implying it is slightly better at f1.8. It is also f1.4.

Whether the 1.4 is worth the extra money (assuming you can afford it) is for the photographer to decide.

--
Leonard Shepherd

Practicing and thinking can do more for good photography than buying or consuming.

 

[Riccardo Polini]

The normal definition of wide is a lens having a focal length wider than the diagonal of the format it is intended to be used on.

The format sizes for medium format are around 80mm (depending on which medium format), 45mm for FX and 35mm for DX.

The DX diagonal is 28 mm (according to Pythagora's theorem, which is exact).
Therefore, 35 mm is not a "normal" lens on DX, but slightly on the tele side.

The same holds for 50 mm on FX/FF. The diagonal of a 24x36 mm rectangle is 43 mm (if Pythagora was right ).

The normal lens on FX is the CV 40/2 Ultron or Nikkor 45/2.8. This is the reason why many photographers considered the 35 mm focal length as "normal" on 24x36 many years ago, and a better alternative to 50 mm.

This is the same reasonn why Fuji has introduced its FinePix X100 large-sensor compact ( http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10091910fujifilmx100.asp ) equipped with a 23 mm (f/2) lens and not a 35mm lens ... 23x1.5 = ? ;-)

 

[Saji Raju]

Leonard Shepherd &　Riccardo Polini ,
Thanks for the informative reply.

 

[GoldRingNikkor]

Henrys lists Sony's 35/1.8 as "wide-angle".

Adorama lists the same Sony 35/1.8 as "wide angle". They also list the Nikon 35/1.8DX as "wide angle".
KEH lists the Nikon 35/1.8 as "wide angle"

Checkmate.

No matter who many camera stores list it wrongly - it's still wrong. 35 (give or take a few mm) is the normal focal length on DX. Period.

 

[GoldRingNikkor]

The DX diagonal is 28 mm (according to Pythagora's theorem, which is exact).
Therefore, 35 mm is not a "normal" lens on DX, but slightly on the tele side.

The same holds for 50 mm on FX/FF. The diagonal of a 24x36 mm rectangle is 43 mm (if Pythagora was right ).

The normal lens on FX is the CV 40/2 Ultron or Nikkor 45/2.8. This is the reason why many photographers considered the 35 mm focal length as "normal" on 24x36 many years ago, and a better alternative to 50 mm.

I think the "normal" lenses for many formats are a wee bit longer than the sensor diagonal (even though the formal definition mentioned by you and LS above is of course correct).

 

[MikeInIndy]

I'm sure they use a generic system that bins lenses by focal length, but the "angle" ie field of view angle, is based on both the focal length of the lens and the size of the sensor it's projecting an image onto. So again, on FX 35mm is certainly a wide angle lens, but it isn't on DX.
--
-Mike

 

[Riccardo Polini]

I think the "normal" lenses for many formats are a wee bit longer than the sensor diagonal (even though the formal definition mentioned by you and LS above is of course correct).

I think that lens manufactures think the normal lens is a bit longer than the sensor diagonal

My personal feeling is that 50 mm on FX (and 35 mm on DX as well) has a sort of "magnifying" effect with respect to common human vision.

On the contrary, on 6x6 the diagonal is 85 mm and the "normal" FL is 80 mm; on 6x4.5 the diagonal is 75mm and the normal lens is the 70/2.8 ... when we think about MF, the normal lens has a FL slightly shorter than the diagonal value.

I guess the 50mm (FX) and 35mm (DX) choices are dictated more by manufacturing costs than "optical" reasons.

 

[Sean Richard]

I was looking at the nikon lens sampler on the nikon website and the 35mm fx does look the same as the dx on a dx body but when looking at the other lengths like 24mm the fx looks much wider on a fx body then it does on a dx body. Why does the 35mm fx look the same on dx bodies but the other lengths do not?