Any D40/D60/D90 Users gonna get this lens?

[rodman]

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX

 

[epp_b]

Yes, but there's no reason not to ask here.

 

[rodman]

Oh man! I'm sorry! I searched for the wrong keywords.

 

[petey]

I have to have one now.

 

[AlexColeman]

I definitely would, now I just want to see if it will beat my 50.

 

[fiveoboy01]

Yes, I'm going to pick this one up instead of the 50mm 1.4G for now, though I may pick up the 50mm down the line...

On a DX sensor it's a better focal length for general use IMO. AND 300 bucks cheaper which is a bonus

 

[LuckySo-n-So]

I'm going to pass on this lens for a while. I just got the 50mm 1.8, and have had time to take exactly 4 pictures with it. On top of that, I have a 70-300 with very limited usage so far.

I clicked on the link in the first post, and then looked at some sample photos taken with the 35mm. It leads me to ask this question: IF this new lens was developed for the D40/x/D60/D90 camera and its many users (80% of the new Nikon market, they say in the article), WHY were the photos taken with the D300???? Doesn't make much sense to me.

It's kind of like introducing a low cost high performance tire for, say, a Chevy Impala-type vehicle, but testing it with a Corvette or Mustang GT.

:dunno:

 

[SlimPaul]

If it will cost as much as the nifty fifty, then I'll buy it.

 

[Graham18ce]

i thought the 35 was built for all the dSLR that weren't full framee which would include the D300.
I have found that some Mags, online Reviewers, will do the bench mark testing on the D300 regardless of the lens being reviewed on the D90 or otherwise. It give the sames values then from lens to lens for light fall off, barrel distortion, etc...
just my 2 cents.
As for the 35mm entering my kit, I'm very happy with the 50mm 1.8 for now and once i get the big lens for shooting sports, i would likely consider a small prime but have been most concidering the Sigma at this point.

 

[Slaphead]

To be honest no. When I buy my next lenses then I want them FX capable. Sooner or later i'll probably end up going full frame - this may not be for a few years, but I want lenses that I buy now to be fully compatible with full frame.

 

[fiveoboy01]

I clicked on the link in the first post, and then looked at some sample photos taken with the 35mm. It leads me to ask this question: IF this new lens was developed for the D40/x/D60/D90 camera and its many users (80% of the new Nikon market, they say in the article), WHY were the photos taken with the D300???? Doesn't make much sense to me.

It's kind of like introducing a low cost high performance tire for, say, a Chevy Impala-type vehicle, but testing it with a Corvette or Mustang GT.

:dunno:

The D300 has a DX sensor just like the other cameras you mentioned.

I'd think it would make sense to take images with the best camera available to them.

 

[AlexColeman]

Yeah, I am going to keep my 50 G, and go with a new mid zoom, possibly a 24-70.

 

[epp_b]

It's kind of like introducing a low cost high performance tire for, say, a Chevy Impala-type vehicle, but testing it with a Corvette or Mustang GT.

No, it's absolutely nothing like that. The D300 is the best and sharpest DX camera, and if there's one camera that will be able to exploit the flaws in a lens, it's the D300.

 

[LuckySo-n-So]

No, it's absolutely nothing like that. The D300 is the best and sharpest DX camera, and if there's one camera that will be able to exploit the flaws in a lens, it's the D300.

OK, point taken. My bad.

 

[EhJsNe]

200 dollars for a f/1.8 lens. Holy [expletive]!

can focus from about a foot...nice nice....and alll at 7oz.

I might get it just so I can play with it on my friends dad's d300. (life sucks when your surrounded by rich people with nice cameras. Life is better when the rich people are nice and let you use there d300 for a few days because his family couldnt make it to a tigers game and really wanted pictures )