No love for the 35mm f1.8?

Started Mar 16, 2020 | Discussions
shadowlands
shadowlands Senior Member • Posts: 1,146
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

Love mine!

-- hide signature --

Nikon Z6
Nikon Z 35mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 85mm f1.8 S
Nikon SB-500

 shadowlands's gear list:shadowlands's gear list
Nikon Z5 Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +1 more
Schorschl Junior Member • Posts: 45
It's better than the Sigma 35/1.4 Art...
3

... at all apertures beginning from 1,8.

No question, the 35/1.8 is a VERY good performer.

ronin Forum Member • Posts: 97
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

ProstheticEmpathy wrote:

I have it, it's fine, it's good, it's better than pretty much every 28mm or 35mm lens I've owned before. It's just not as good as the 50mm f/1.8S and it's not as good as the 24-70mm f/2.8S, which makes it the worst Z lens I own.

Lol.. I also have all three and that's exactly how I feel.  The 50 1.8S is the best of the three, but the 24-70 2.8S is no slouch either.

vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,512
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

ronin wrote:

ProstheticEmpathy wrote:

I have it, it's fine, it's good, it's better than pretty much every 28mm or 35mm lens I've owned before. It's just not as good as the 50mm f/1.8S and it's not as good as the 24-70mm f/2.8S, which makes it the worst Z lens I own.

Lol.. I also have all three and that's exactly how I feel. The 50 1.8S is the best of the three, but the 24-70 2.8S is no slouch either.

But worst in what meanings?

Sharpness,details,colors,bokeh...?

BTW I shoot mostly landscapes,street and travel

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
SpacemanUA
SpacemanUA Senior Member • Posts: 1,731
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
2

vegetaleb wrote:

But worst in what meanings?

Sharpness,details,colors,bokeh...?

BTW I shoot mostly landscapes,street and travel

I really don't thing that words like "bad" or "worse" should be used here. All Z lenses are spectacular. It just happened that 50S is a masterpiece at very reasonable price for such performance. And while I haven'e had a change to use 24-70/2.8S, it's owners saying that it's a best lens in this class.

Speaking of various 35 mils, only Tamron SP 35/1.4 is better optically than Z35, but at a huge price of size, weight and portability. And some features as well. Sigma is only better at one thing: it can be opened to f/1.4. Z35 is better at everything else. Yes, it's a but overpriced, but it is what it is. If you're with Z system already, just get it and forget that $200 difference with Sony 35/1.8 or whatsoever. Consider it as a donation in Nikon's development

For landscapes you want best IQ and sharpness all over the frame. Z35 is amazingly sharp stopped down to it's sweet spot.

Street - you would want a lens that is fast to operate and doesn't attract much attention. Tammy is not such lens, it looks like a bazooka BTW, dpreview has a nice short video review of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AHVGP_dEyA

Travel - well, you know your answer here. 13.05 oz / 370 g, as compact as possible, no adapters needed, weather sealing - there's simply nothing that can beat it.

The only situation when I can recommend Tamron or Sigma over Nikon is if you exclusively shoot portraits wide open with 35mm lens and use it for portraits for 80% time or more and don't care about size, weight and portability.

bokemon Regular Member • Posts: 430
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

SpacemanUA wrote:

And if you have a review showing that there's less LoCA, share it please.

https://www.lenstip.com/570.5-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_35_mm_f_1.4_Di_USD_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html

 bokemon's gear list:bokemon's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic G85 Nikon Z6 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro +15 more
vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,512
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

SpacemanUA wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

But worst in what meanings?

Sharpness,details,colors,bokeh...?

BTW I shoot mostly landscapes,street and travel

I really don't thing that words like "bad" or "worse" should be used here. All Z lenses are spectacular. It just happened that 50S is a masterpiece at very reasonable price for such performance. And while I haven'e had a change to use 24-70/2.8S, it's owners saying that it's a best lens in this class.

Speaking of various 35 mils, only Tamron SP 35/1.4 is better optically than Z35, but at a huge price of size, weight and portability. And some features as well. Sigma is only better at one thing: it can be opened to f/1.4. Z35 is better at everything else. Yes, it's a but overpriced, but it is what it is. If you're with Z system already, just get it and forget that $200 difference with Sony 35/1.8 or whatsoever. Consider it as a donation in Nikon's development

For landscapes you want best IQ and sharpness all over the frame. Z35 is amazingly sharp stopped down to it's sweet spot.

Street - you would want a lens that is fast to operate and doesn't attract much attention. Tammy is not such lens, it looks like a bazooka BTW, dpreview has a nice short video review of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AHVGP_dEyA

Travel - well, you know your answer here. 13.05 oz / 370 g, as compact as possible, no adapters needed, weather sealing - there's simply nothing that can beat it.

The only situation when I can recommend Tamron or Sigma over Nikon is if you exclusively shoot portraits wide open with 35mm lens and use it for portraits for 80% time or more and don't care about size, weight and portability.

Thanks

Yes it's indeed overpriced, I would get it either used at 500$  or wait for offers, perhaps after the corona crisis is finished they will do offers to promote sales again.

Meanwhile my 24-70 f4 is really fantastic, can't wait to try astro, it's stormy here

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
bcdepew New Member • Posts: 12
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

I absolutely love the 35mm f1.8 dx lens. I’ve used it on the d3500, d7200, and now my z50 with the ftz.

If you’re shouting with a z50, get one.  I can’t wait for them to come out with a z dx version. I hope they do anyway.

sunnycal
sunnycal Regular Member • Posts: 487
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

When I think about 35mm prime, I think light and compact. This does not apply to the 35mm S. Hence I ended up selling it. Also the IQ, though not bad, was not really something to be excited about.

 sunnycal's gear list:sunnycal's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D810 Sony a6300 Sony a7R III Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +13 more
39matt Contributing Member • Posts: 601
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
7

Its great for weddings which I use it for alongside the 85mm f.18 s as it has the low light advantage and works great wide open. Colour rendition and contrast is also great. Whats not to like...

vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,512
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
2

sunnycal wrote:

When I think about 35mm prime, I think light and compact. This does not apply to the 35mm S. Hence I ended up selling it. Also the IQ, though not bad, was not really something to be excited about.

It's perhaps the lightest lens for the Z series, it's 130grm lighter than the 24-70 f4. The combo 35mm f1.8 + Z6 = x-t4+ 16mm f1.4 in weight, which is great.

The upcoming Z 28mm f2 or f2.8 will be lighter, I hope between 250 and 300grm, it will make the combo weight very light for a FF

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
shadowlands
shadowlands Senior Member • Posts: 1,146
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

39matt wrote:

Its great for weddings which I use it for alongside the 85mm f.18 s as it has the low light advantage and works great wide open. Colour rendition and contrast is also great. Whats not to like...

Agreed!!!!

-- hide signature --

Nikon Z6
Nikon Z 35mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 85mm f1.8 S
Nikon SB-500

 shadowlands's gear list:shadowlands's gear list
Nikon Z5 Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +1 more
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 20,937
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

Bjorn Rorslett's view on lens testing is "interesting" and IMO very substantially accurate

"People have repeatedly asked me to provide an overview of these and other lenses to show their image-producing potential. True, a number of excellent resources for evaluating lenses are found on the Net. Many are based upon subjective evaluation of the items in question, but only a few sites can provide a truly encompassing overview based on a single person's experience. On the other hand, sites exist that overwhelm you with MTF plots purportedly providing indisputable facts. MTF methodology has a genuine scientific foundation and there is nothing "wrong" with MTF as such. I even understand the mathematical equations. However, such statistics basically are as helpful as knowing the mass of a lens - on its own, MFT testing cannot predict the pictorial outcome of any lens. Thus, MTF tests will not show all problems from field curvature, colour fringing, flare and ghosting, the variability in performance that arises from near or distant focus, the subjective 'feel' of the images and in particular the out-of-focus rendition (given the buzz word of 'bokeh'), the way a lens handles under actual use, and so on. MTF data can just indicate there is a problem with a lens, or that a particular lens might be an excellent piece of glass. All of this information can be obtained as easy (but likely not as fast) just by shooting pictures with the lens. Averaging MTF numbers to arrive at a single value in order to rank lens quality is simply impossible and largely a waste of time."

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +28 more
vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,512
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

Bjorn Rorslett's view on lens testing is "interesting" and IMO very substantially accurate

"People have repeatedly asked me to provide an overview of these and other lenses to show their image-producing potential. True, a number of excellent resources for evaluating lenses are found on the Net. Many are based upon subjective evaluation of the items in question, but only a few sites can provide a truly encompassing overview based on a single person's experience. On the other hand, sites exist that overwhelm you with MTF plots purportedly providing indisputable facts. MTF methodology has a genuine scientific foundation and there is nothing "wrong" with MTF as such. I even understand the mathematical equations. However, such statistics basically are as helpful as knowing the mass of a lens - on its own, MFT testing cannot predict the pictorial outcome of any lens. Thus, MTF tests will not show all problems from field curvature, colour fringing, flare and ghosting, the variability in performance that arises from near or distant focus, the subjective 'feel' of the images and in particular the out-of-focus rendition (given the buzz word of 'bokeh'), the way a lens handles under actual use, and so on. MTF data can just indicate there is a problem with a lens, or that a particular lens might be an excellent piece of glass. All of this information can be obtained as easy (but likely not as fast) just by shooting pictures with the lens. Averaging MTF numbers to arrive at a single value in order to rank lens quality is simply impossible and largely a waste of time."

That's why I read every pages of the reviews on lenstip, they have mtf charts as well as CA levels, resistance to sun, coma, bokeh balls, AF...

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 20,937
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

vegetaleb wrote:

That's why I read every pages of the reviews on lenstip, they have mtf charts as well as CA levels, resistance to sun, coma, bokeh balls, AF...

None of this is the same as taking the type of photos you normally do - and the only "photographic photographs" at lenstip include the camera at a deliberate angle to the horizon.

MTF charts of the type used (as distinct from some lens manufacturers MTF) do not show long edge or corner results.

Lenstip is helpful but for my needs, as with many sites, somewhat flawed.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +28 more
vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,512
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

JERRY100 wrote:

Have both, including 50 1.8S. 35mm S is great and my most used lens. Can really recommend it.

Thanks

From the reviews it looks like the 50mm has better sharpness wide open and CA.

Dunno if you can feel it with your everyday photos?

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 20,937
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?
1

vegetaleb wrote:

From the reviews it looks like the 50mm has better sharpness wide open and CA.

Why choose on the basis of specification alone?

Surely the main purpose of a prime covering 35mm or a zoom covering 35mm is the unique angle of view you get shooting at 35mm 

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +28 more
Rich Rosen Senior Member • Posts: 2,969
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

From the reviews it looks like the 50mm has better sharpness wide open and CA.

Why choose on the basis of specification alone?

Surely the main purpose of a prime covering 35mm or a zoom covering 35mm is the unique angle of view you get shooting at 35mm

Yes, comparing the 50 to the 35 makes no sense, unless you are also comparing an FX sensor with the 50 and a DX SENSOR with the 35, whose angle or field of view is about the same as a 50 on an FX camera. The 35 1.8s isn't a slouch. It is probably the best 35 Nikon has offered for either F mount or Z mount cameras. That does not mean that other brands aren't better than the S. But people like me, who don't like using the FTZ adapter (yes, at the time of purchase I spent $150 on it), that would be the only game in town, unless I choose to use my 28 1.8G, which is wider, or my 24-70 f4 which doesn't have the same low light capability as the 35 1.8s.

 Rich Rosen's gear list:Rich Rosen's gear list
Nikon D1X Nikon D500 Fujifilm X-E3 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +22 more
shadowlands
shadowlands Senior Member • Posts: 1,146
Re: No love for the 35mm f1.8?

Rich Rosen wrote:

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

From the reviews it looks like the 50mm has better sharpness wide open and CA.

Why choose on the basis of specification alone?

Surely the main purpose of a prime covering 35mm or a zoom covering 35mm is the unique angle of view you get shooting at 35mm

Yes, comparing the 50 to the 35 makes no sense, unless you are also comparing an FX sensor with the 50 and a DX SENSOR with the 35, whose angle or field of view is about the same as a 50 on an FX camera. The 35 1.8s isn't a slouch. It is probably the best 35 Nikon has offered for either F mount or Z mount cameras. That does not mean that other brands aren't better than the S. But people like me, who don't like using the FTZ adapter (yes, at the time of purchase I spent $150 on it), that would be the only game in town, unless I choose to use my 28 1.8G, which is wider, or my 24-70 f4 which doesn't have the same low light capability as the 35 1.8s.

I love both the 35mm and 50mm. Two different focal ranges. Can't compare. Nikon's best 35mm prime... The new Z 35mm F1.8 S, for now, anyway.

-- hide signature --

Nikon Z6
Nikon Z 35mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 S
Nikon Z 85mm f1.8 S
Nikon SB-500

 shadowlands's gear list:shadowlands's gear list
Nikon Z5 Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 Nikon Z 85mm F1.8 Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 VR +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads