Nikon 35 1.8G? Underwhelmed by this lens! Over rated?

Nikon_Josh · Nov 10, 2011

I know this is a weird thing to post, I have just got a Nikon 35 1.8G and feel slightly underwhelmed by it. It is such a raved about lens that I thought it would be a case of 'love at first sight'. For some reason the fact I get noticeable distortion in every image really irritates me and the CA is a bit of a downer aswell. My Nikon 18-55 does not have any distortion at 35mm for a start. Don't get me wrong it is very very sharp but I just am sat here wondering why people love this lens so much... Is it all just hype? I am struggling to understand the hype right now!

Now.... I am hoping people will reassure me here and restore my faith in my purchase... I adore my other two primes. My Sigma 50 and Tamron 90 as they are wonderful at what they do! I can't understand why the 35 is leaving me so cold! Part of me now feels I may be better off with a mid range zoom again. But the mid range zoom I really want which is the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS is a hell of alot more cash to stump up... So maybe I should quit whining and live with the 35mm. All thoughts welcome.. Is this lens over rated or have I not fully opened my mind to the possibilities of it???

MTVision · Nov 10, 2011

I think a few people on this site have returned the 35 1.8 because of the issues with it.

Nikon_Josh · Nov 10, 2011

MTVision said:
I think a few people on this site have returned the 35 1.8 because of the issues with it.

I have noticed some people have said exactly that, I just want to know if their is an alternative or if I have not given this lens a chance. I guess the Sigma 50 and Tamron 90 I have are so perfect, I had huge expectations for the Nikon aswell.

2WheelPhoto · Nov 10, 2011

I sold mine due to aberrations. I don't think the aberrations are Nikon specific for such a budget lens. Here is a very thorough critique of the lens: Nikon AF-S 35mm F1.8G DX Lens Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

KmH · Nov 10, 2011

For the price, it's hard to beat.

It's an inexpensive, entry-level, consumer lens.

Derrel · Nov 10, 2011

"inexpensive, entry-level, consumer lens."

Translates to "affordable for many people", "lacks features better lenses have" and "designed for people who do not know or do not wish,to have the highest-quality."

We see the same thing with the Canon "nifty-fifty"...and the various low,low cost 70-300 zooms, and now the 55-200 lenses.

Nikon_Josh · Nov 10, 2011

Derrel said:
"inexpensive, entry-level, consumer lens."

Translates to "affordable for many people", "lacks features better lenses have" and "designed for people who do not know or do not wish,to have the highest-quality."

We see the same thing with the Canon "nifty-fifty"...and the various low,low cost 70-300 zooms, and now the 55-200 lenses.

This brings up another point actually, it highlights than generally speaking if you want the lenses that have the best of all worlds you also have to remortgage your house in the process.. photography is an expensive profession for the layman.

Perhaps my obsession with this lenses minor weaknesses is irrational, when I don't have the cash to stump up for a 35 1.4 afs G. Maybe I need to get the best out of this lens, instead of obsessing over it's weak poi
I guess even the stupidly expensive lenses suffer from their own degree of distortion and CA problems?

Derrel · Nov 10, 2011

The vast majority of the distortion and CA issues the lens has can be corrected in software. Same with dozens and dozens of other lenses. Nikon Capture has profiles that are designed for ALL the new lenses. Now,whether people are aware of this, or will use this capability is another matter...

Nikon_Josh · Nov 10, 2011

Derrel said:
The vast majority of the distortion and CA issues the lens has can be corrected in software. Same with dozens and dozens of other lenses. Nikon Capture has profiles that are designed for ALL the new lenses. Now,whether people are aware of this, or will use this capability is another matter...

Thanks Derrel Mate, you have set me straight again! I will go out and do something novel... take some photographs... instead of obsessing over issues that can be corrected in Lightroom.

Derrel · Nov 10, 2011

I spent $180 on groceries last week. That food will be gone soon. A $199 lens will probably last two decades in normal use.

Markw · Nov 11, 2011

I have the lens. I definitely like it for what it's for. TACK sharp. I dare you to find a comparable lens in it's price range. My copy is incredibly sharp. And what Derrel says is 100% true. The problems are simple to fix. You could always go for the 35/2.0 if you'd rather. I'm not sure if it suffers from the same problem. Sigma offers a 30/1.4 for more than double the price. I'd say run around and actually use it, see if you can deal with the very fine images it produces. I can see your quibles with it, though.

Mark

MReid · Nov 11, 2011

I love mine. I have only ever shot it at 1.8 and never noticed and problem with distortion or CA.
I mostly use it on my D3 in low light, so sharp at 1.8.

Nikon_Josh · Nov 12, 2011

Markw said:
I have the lens. I definitely like it for what it's for. TACK sharp. I dare you to find a comparable lens in it's price range. My copy is incredibly sharp. And what Derrel says is 100% true. The problems are simple to fix. You could always go for the 35/2.0 if you'd rather. I'm not sure if it suffers from the same problem. Sigma offers a 30/1.4 for more than double the price. I'd say run around and actually use it, see if you can deal with the very fine images it produces. I can see your quibles with it, though.

Mark

Thanks Mark, I am using it again looking at it with a different attitude. you are correct the sharpness is TACK sharp and the bokeh is pretty OK aswell. I think I will be forcing myself to work with this focal length a bit more aswell, simply as it is forcing me to think about composition. Primes are good for that aren' t they?

MReid said:
I love mine. I have only ever shot it at 1.8 and never noticed and problem with distortion or CA.

MReid said:
I mostly use it on my D3 in low light, so sharp at 1.8.

This is interesting.... I have heard about people using the 35 on a full frame before and loving the results it produces.. I understand the vignetting is bad when stopped down. But at 1.8.. the slight vignetting can add to the images. Do you Care to post any of your fave pics taken with this lens on the D3 MReid?

Markw · Nov 12, 2011

If I understand correctly, he probably has the camera in DX crop mode, where the FOV will be the same as with your crop camera, but with 6 or so MP.

Mark

Nikon_Josh · Nov 12, 2011

Markw said:
If I understand correctly, he probably has the camera in DX crop mode, where the FOV will be the same as with your crop camera, but with 6 or so MP.

Mark

Mark, check this out.. I couldn't believe it when I saw it.. this guy is using it in FX mode and getting some good results!

Nikkor 35/1.8G DX - It's Great! - FM Forums The vignetting kinda adds to it!