I already have the AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G and really like it (mainly for family snapshots), so I figured I'd take a look at the AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.4G when it came out.
Now here's the question: The f1.4 lens lists at nine times the cost of the f1.8 lens ($200 vs $1800), and I'm curious as to why?
I understand Nikon can ask whatever they want to for a lens, however, how is that cost justified in the minds of the people that buy it?
The f1.4 lens is both FX and DX compatible, is obviously faster glass, and has a Nano Crystal Coat (for what that's worth), but is there something else I'm missing that makes this lens so much more expensive?
Thanks, Ralph
Now here's the question: The f1.4 lens lists at nine times the cost of the f1.8 lens ($200 vs $1800), and I'm curious as to why?
I understand Nikon can ask whatever they want to for a lens, however, how is that cost justified in the minds of the people that buy it?
The f1.4 lens is both FX and DX compatible, is obviously faster glass, and has a Nano Crystal Coat (for what that's worth), but is there something else I'm missing that makes this lens so much more expensive?
Thanks, Ralph