Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens Discussions | Drop

Mar 31, 2018

this is a meh lens, buy this knowing that this is the lower end.

Vote

Mar 31, 2018

johnypony3Not sure where you got got that idea, this is one of the best Nikon DX Lenses. It's cheap because it's a prime, not because it's lower end. The price isn't that great of a deal though. I've seen it for less on sale at Target.

Mar 31, 2018

johnypony3Agreed with hyplasma - this is a great lens, and anyone with decent skills can take amazing shots with this. That said, it is DX format, but this is a fast, sharp, prime lens that takes amazing photos. I have taken everything from product shots with creamy bokeh, to milky way shots when an unexpected opportunity arose. The price is no deal tho. I got mine off of Amazon for $10 less, with Prime shipping. I've seen this lens at a better deal routinely.

Mar 31, 2018

hvplasmai guess youre not noticing the G? or are you not aware that the G or gold banded lenses are lower quality? 50mm 1.4f D vs G is 350$ vs 200$.

Vote

Apr 1, 2018

g33kyg1rla person with decent skills can take great shots with an iphone. but a pro will not use a G lens, nor would they not splurge for a 1.4f. and trust me, the difference is big.

Vote

Apr 1, 2018

johnypony350mm on a crop frame is nowhere near as useful at 35mm. 1.8f is a significant upgrade from any of the kit lenses. I've never seen anything other than positive reviews from this lens. This is a solid lens. You do not have a leg to stand on here.

Apr 1, 2018

johnypony3You are kinda making my point. I did say that this is DX. A pro is not going to typically shoot with DX, or buy a lens on Massdrop. Massdrop is not a professional photographer geared site. It's a site that is geared towards the masses, and for the masses with a DX camera, this is a great lens. For pros, it's irrelevant, as they are not going to be shooting DX anyway.

Apr 1, 2018

g33kyg1rlEvery professional photographer I've ever known that has used Nikon bodies has had both FX and DX bodies. I'm not sure where you got the idea that crop frame was inferior. There are applications where DX is superior, sports photography for instance.

Apr 1, 2018

hvplasmaNo one is saying that crop frame is inferior, but you are once again making my point. We can debate FX vs DX all day long, but the fact remains that this is not a lens geared towards a pro. A pro is going to know what G means. A pro is going to know whether this lens is suitable for them. A pro is probably not going to reading the discussion, as they will already know whether this lens is suitable for them. This site is geared towards the masses, and for a crop camera, this is an excellent lens for the vast majority of casual/enthusiast photographers out there. Saying it is a 'meh' lens, is like telling the average person that a Toyota is a 'meh' car. Is a professional driver going to be happy with the acceleration on a Toyota? Of course not. But the average person will be very happy with the value, reliability, and performance of a Toyota. Same for this lens. The average person will find it to be a very useful, (far more useful than a 50 on a crop sensor) that is a siginificantly better lens than the kit, and will be very happy with the results, particularly at the price point.

Apr 1, 2018

g33kyg1rlI'm not sure what you're even trying to argue at this point. This is not a "lower end" lens. At this focal length this is as good as you're going to get without paying more than double for less than even a full stop more light. On FX or DX. Do you have any source at all for the claims you're making?

Apr 1, 2018

hvplasmaI am actually in full agreement with you, but let me clear one thing up. I was mutli-tasking when I responded, and thought I was responding to Johnypony3. I have 4 pros in my family, and when I was first learning about photography, this is the exact lens that they all recommended I buy. Johnypony3 is the one who said it is 'meh', and said it was lower end. The whole Toyota analogy was meant for him (my mistake). My point, (again, disagreeing with Johnypony3) is that this is NOT an inferior lens, but that it is DX, and the DX line was created for consumers and enthusiasts, not pros, (at least this is what Nikon themselves said the last time my uncle interviewed someone from the company). My point, (again, I thought I was responding to Johnypony3) is that a pro is going to know all of this stuff, and whether the lens is appropriate for them. Telling people here that this lens is 'meh' is not accurate. This is a great lens, (which I own myself) but it is DX, geared for a consumer/enthusiast driven line, on a site that is mainly visited by conumers. Sorry for my mangled response. I think this is a great lens, and was trying to disagree with Johnypony3's arguments, not yours.

Apr 1, 2018

g33kyg1rlI'm so sorry, I thought I was replying to the same person! How embarrassing lol.

Apr 1, 2018

hvplasmaSame here. I got all screwed up in the responses. LOL

Apr 1, 2018

hvplasmai realize that, the point was an example of the price. i would not buy this, especially at this price point. you want to buy a G lens? do it. but a D 35mm prime 1.4f wouldnt be much more, and would be a much better investment.

Vote

agentcrm

Apr 3, 2018

johnypony3No a 35mm prime 1.4f would not be a good investment for someone with a cropped sensor camera. The 1.4 is a higher end FX lens at $1,700! If you're going to troll, at least know you're subject and cost.