Nikkor 35mm 1.8 G DX

shivaswrath · Feb 9, 2009

Yes you read that right, DX?!!

For $199?!!

Guess target the D40/D60/D90/D300 users?

I'm a little stunned with this. . .I was going to buy the 35 2.0 this year, so I can double use on FX bodies, but hmmm. . .I guess DX ain't so dead yet?

Nikon launches AF-S 35mm F1.8 DX prime: Digital Photography Review

elemental · Feb 9, 2009

"Making it a modern alternative to the traditional 50mm lenses as used on 35mm film bodies."

Finally, someone gets back to this concept. 50s on APS-C are so much less useful than on 35mm. I really hope they start offering these with D60s and D90s. The entry-level world would be a better place.

TUX424 · Feb 9, 2009

I just check that article out and they look great i love M/A but the price point is 199 pounds not USD, which comes to be around $300 USD still not a bad price for the people that want that usefulness that they can AF on a D40/60 with the crop factor.

Joves · Feb 9, 2009

At $300 they need to get rid of the plastic mount. To be truthful. I only have 2 DX lenses and that is all I plan on.

elemental · Feb 9, 2009

TUX424 said:
I just check that article out and they look great i love M/A but the price point is 199 pounds not USD, which comes to be around $300 USD still not a bad price for the people that want that usefulness that they can AF on a D40/60 with the crop factor.

That's actually a pretty substantial difference. I was thinking this would be the perfect lens to mate to a D200, but for $300 I could have the 28mm f/2.8 D (similar focal length, one stop slower), the 50mm f/1.8, and some money left over for another cheap third-party flash. Or a 28mm and some sort of 17mm/18mm prime (perhaps manual focus- I don't really mind).

This could be a great lens and I hope it represents a shift in the thinking about prime focal lengths for crop bodies, but for $300 it's no revolution.

Also, I like buying used.

shivaswrath · Feb 9, 2009

pre-order available on amazon.com!

I'm going to check it out before I discount it completely. . .

epp_b · Feb 9, 2009

Barring any major brain farts from Nikon, this will be my next lens. Please, Nikon, can I buy it yesterday?

I just check that article out and they look great i love M/A but the price point is 199 pounds not USD, which comes to be around $300 USD still not a bad price for the people that want that usefulness that they can AF on a D40/60 with the crop factor.

Not necessarily. Simply currency conversion does not factor in the market forces that also determine the price in a given locale.

Bigpopa · Feb 9, 2009

I cannot find it on Amazon ............

blash · Feb 10, 2009

For $200 that's a very, very nice lens for entry DSLR users. Hopefully they will bundle this together with D40s/D60s in the near future since I know a lot of people who don't bother buying another lens once they buy their camera, can't see the point of blowing TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS, especially in today's economy.

In response to someone above, most beginners that this lens is marketed to don't give two craps on whether or not it's a plastic mount. All they know is that they're going to get phenomenal IQ (.....right, Nikon?) at a great focal length.

If this were a FX lens I would've bought it.

shivaswrath · Feb 10, 2009

Bigpopa said:
I cannot find it on Amazon ............

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001S2PPT0?ie=UTF8&tag=nikorumo-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B001S2PPT0]Amazon.com: Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo[/ame]

shivaswrath · Feb 10, 2009

Mind you, according to an interview on dpreview, this is only the first of more lenses this year, so I would imagine they are going to release the 35 1.8 pretty rapidly in enough supply, saturate all those employed D40/D60/D90 users with a nice prime, and follow with some more expensive DX/FX solutions. . .unless they release more DX primes, which has arguably been their largest gap in the lineup. .

To be fair, the 14-24 and 24-70 AF-S DX/FX lenses have been a nod in the direction of the FX year (circa 2008), with the D700 and D3 becoming more reasonable for pro's to use and amateurs to afford. . .expanding the DX line this year would make some sense, but to what end I have no clue. . .

35mm F1.8 for DX? What is Nikon up to?: Digital Photography Review

In either case, I've pre-ordered it to check it out, worst case, I'll have a a 35, 18-55 and 55-200 in my DX only line up, save for the 50mm that covers both DX and FX. . .

I'm purchasing the 14-24mm when its price normalizes, so that would at least cover DX and FX as well. . .

Why they do this to us, I have no clue. . .

Defy · Feb 10, 2009

So do we wait until the VR version comes out? Or do we not need it with this? I have 18-55 VR kit lens and the 55-200 VR kit lens. I want something cheap and fast and this seams to fit the bill but i don't know if i should wait for the VR version or will there even be a VR version??

blash · Feb 11, 2009

You're not going to need VR with a short-focal length f/1.8 lens, and you don't even really need VR on that 18-55 - just speed up the shutter speed until the camera shake goes away (the slowest shutter speed you ever use with any lens is 1 over the focal length of the lens, while in daylight at f/16 while hand-holding).

jlykins · Feb 11, 2009

This is great for D40, D40X, and D60 people, but for anyone with AF motors built in, not really that great. For a few dollars more you can get the 35mm f/2 which is better built, and will work when you move up to a FX body. I know, I know the focal view is different, but still... For $200 it might be something nice to play around with and keep on the backup body we'll see...