so should I get it ot not? 35mm f1.8 nikkor

[bonosa1]

I like my 50mm f1.8 and wanted a bit more of a wide angle. Keep reading conflicting reviews about the 35 mm f 1.8
Does anyone have it and do you like it?
The most important thing to me is sharpness. I have plenty of zooms and they don't compare with primes...

 

[PhotoXopher]

I had it, nice little lens... I traded it for a Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 (awesome lens), then sold that for a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, then returned that and got a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8.

Now I'm happy

 

[bonosa1]

:mrgreen: great!
the sigma is as sharp as a prime?

 

[PhotoXopher]

If you don't mind me posting a couple examples, nothing to hide - full resolution, dial-up beware!

Focus on fingertip:
http://www.naumans.com/Photography/Sigma-18-50-F28-HSM-Macro/DSC1210/706197753_9Dspm-O.jpg

Focus on straw tip, keep in mind this is a stir straw with about a 2mm opening
http://www.naumans.com/Photography/Sigma-18-50-F28-HSM-Macro/DSC1342/708298251_urKFx-O.jpg

 

[bonosa1]

If you don't mind me posting a couple examples, nothing to hide - full resolution examples:

http://www.naumans.com/Photography/Sigma-18-50-F28-HSM-Macro/DSC1210/706197753_9Dspm-O.jpg

http://www.naumans.com/Photography/Sigma-18-50-F28-HSM-Macro/DSC1342/708298251_urKFx-O.jpg

OMG!!! Is there a :fainted: icon on this forum? LOL
That is simply AWESOME!!!!
Wow! Thank you :mrgreen:

 

[PhotoXopher]

Kind of my reaction when I first saw what this lens was capable of too

$360 at photo4less.com, I'm very happy with them.

 

[GeneralBenson]

Those pictures aren't anything I would consider exceptionally sharp.

 

[PhotoXopher]

For being handheld and wide open in somewhat dim house lighting, I couldn't be happier!

Here's a couple taken with the 35 1.8:

http://www.naumans.com/photos/494222137_TP5u5-O.jpg

http://www.naumans.com/photos/494222143_sLsBw-O.jpg

 

[GeneralBenson]

I must say, both lenses have a very nice bokeh. But the 35/1.8 definitely seems sharper.

 

[PhotoXopher]

It's a great little lens, I don't think you can go wrong.

If I remember (and there's similar lighting) I'll try and get the same house number and salt/pepper shaker shot tonight with the Sigma for a closer head to head comparison.

 

[Gregoryniss]

I love the 35mm f/1.8 AF-S DX lens. Before I bought my 18-200, it was the lens that spend the most time on my DLSR.

This picture was taken at f/2.8. Focused on the eyes, no post processing done except for the crop. I'd say the picture is pretty sharp

 

[TJ K]

I have this lens. It's a great lens but it is DX. So if you plan on going full frame anytime soon then I would say don't get it. Get a 35 f/2 or 501.8 or 1.4 If you're not this lens is so sharp and light. It has a rubber gasket to keep anything from getting in behind the lens. Colors are great and everything. Check out my flickr a lot of those pictures are with it. In my blog the photos on there like the spider one were with this beauty. GL
tj

 

[PhotoXopher]

I should note that the only reason I sold it in the first place is because it was either too wide, or not wide enough for my needs.

Performance wise, it's probably the deal of the decade along with the 50 1.8 of course.

 

[ANDS!]

If you already have a 50MM, I would say the two are too close in focal length to give you noticeably different results (nevermind it is not particularly wide). NOYZE's suggestion is the better option: get one of those new wide angle lenses I keep hearing people talk about. I've thought about selling my Tokina 12-24 and Sigma 24-60 and picking up one of those Sigma's for use as a walk around (I would say out of all my lenses, the 12-24 gets the least workout). In fact, funk, I'm starting to get a little "new lens" itch. . .god damn my need to help and opening this thread.

 

[PatrickHMS]

I had it, nice little lens... I traded it for a Nikon 35-70 f/2.8 (awesome lens), then sold that for a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, then returned that and got a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8.

Now I'm happy

I did the same thing...

Had a Nikon 35mm 1.8 AF-S, value about $200.00
Had a Nikon 50mm 1.8 AF-D, value about $100.00

Found a Nikon 35-70mm AF-D constant 2.8 with Macro for just about $300.00 (except that it does not work on my D40X).

Also have the Sigma 18-50mm AF HSM constant 2.8 with Macro for $350.00 (it will work on my D40X).

Planning to keep one of them, sell one.

The 18-50mm, or the 50-70mm, either one can come in handy sometimes.

Can't really decide which one I like best, which I want to keep.

Miss having the 18-50mm on one lens, the 50-70mm on the other, either of these zoom lenses loses a little bokeh to a prime, but the bokeh and DOF are pretty nice on both for zoom lenses.

What do you think Noyze!

I could have the Nikon 35-70mm AND Nikon 50mm AF D 1.8 for not much more than the value of the Sigma. But the Sigma works on D40X.

What to do, what to do...

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: