Should I get the Nikon 35mm 1.8?

evanmyrick · Jul 11, 2014

Hello, this is my 1st post on the forums. About four months ago I decided to purchase my first DSLR (Nikon D3200). I've always had a love for photography and was considering pursuing a career in the field. Since acquiring the camera and taking a few thousand photos my passion for photography and art has only grown. I'm starting to take it all very seriously. I still have tons to learn and really need to spend a lot of time deciding what styles of photography I'm going to focus on and market myself with. Concert, street, landscape, portrait and product photography are all styles that interest me. My D3200 was a bundle that came with the body, a Nikon 18-55mm VR lens and a 55-200mm VR lens. At this point I don't necessarily NEED another lens considering I'm still learning a lot about my camera and digital photography in general, but I'm considering getting the Nikon 35mm 1.8 because I've read that it performs better in low light situations and is simply an overall better lens than the 18-55mm. The 35mm is available brand new for 159.00 on ebay right now so the price isn't too much of a concern. Considering my situation do you think it's worth getting the 35mm? I want to learn and progress as much as possible this summer and want to start doing a lot more portraits. Any opinions or general advice would be appreciated. Where does the 35mm shine compared to the 18-55mm VR and vice versa. Thanks!

Chrispyphotos · Jul 11, 2014

It will definitely perform better in low light considering you'll be able to open it up a lot more to light. However, keep in mind it is a fixed lens.. so you will be doing a lot more foot work to frame your photos, and I'm not sure how well it would work with the broad range of things you will be shooting. That was my first lens I bought when I bought my first DSLR and it was pretty awesome being able to get the separation that it provides, but I ended up getting rid of Nikon and that lens, and when I switched to Canon have had no intentions on buying it again. But I like zooms more, so it's pretty dependent on whether you want primes or zooms. If you want a 35mm for the cheap price to practice, go for it...you won't have any problems selling it for about 20-30 dollars less than what you paid for it once you are done.

robbins.photo · Jul 11, 2014

evanmyrick said:
Hello, this is my 1st post on the forums. About four months ago I decided to purchase my first DSLR (Nikon D3200). I've always had a love for photography and was considering pursuing a career in the field. Since acquiring the camera and taking a few thousand photos my passion for photography and art has only grown. I'm starting to take it all very seriously. I still have tons to learn and really need to spend a lot of time deciding what styles of photography I'm going to focus on and market myself with. Concert, street, landscape, portrait and product photography are all styles that interest me. My D3200 was a bundle that came with the body, a Nikon 18-55mm VR lens and a 55-200mm VR lens. At this point I don't necessarily NEED another lens considering I'm still learning a lot about my camera and digital photography in general, but I'm considering getting the Nikon 35mm 1.8 because I've read that it performs better in low light situations and is simply an overall better lens than the 18-55mm. The 35mm is available brand new for 159.00 on ebay right now so the price isn't too much of a concern. Considering my situation do you think it's worth getting the 35mm? I want to learn and progress as much as possible this summer and want to start doing a lot more portraits. Any opinions or general advice would be appreciated. Where does the 35mm shine compared to the 18-55mm VR and vice versa. Thanks!

Ok, well first I don't own a 35 mm prime, but I do have the 50 mm prime. I think you'll find that with the 3200's 24 mp sensor you might occasionally have to back up to frame a shot the way you want, but you won't have to move forward that much as with the higher MP sensor you can crop quite a bit and post and still get great results.

I love my 50 mm myself, and I've certainly considered adding the 35 to my bag at some point as well. If you have an 18-55, what I would do is set it at 35 mm and leave it there and go out and shoot like that for a few days. See if that will work for you, and if so then the 35 mm prime would probably be a great investment for you.

KmH · Jul 11, 2014

At $159 new on eBay I would make sure the lens is not a gray market lens (a lens intended for sale outside the USA) that does not have a Nikon USA serial number.

Nikon USA service does not work on non US serial numbered gear. Not even for pay.
When registered with Nikon USA, a Nikon lens having a US serial number gets an additional 4 years of warranty coverage making the warranty (to the original owner only) a 5 year warranty.

This is about the best price for a new Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens

The lens is a consumer grade lens and has some issues:
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm 1:1.8G DX review: Digital Photography Review
• Slightly soft focus and suffers a lack of contrast when used wide open (f/1.8). Stopping the lens down to f/3.5 or more addresses the soft focus/low contrast. Note that your 18-55 is f/3.5 at 18 mm already unless you choose to use a smaller lens aperture like f/4

• Lateral chromatic aberration, which is fixable post process using image editing software like Photoshop.

• Prone to purple fringing and bokeh chromatic aberration, most visible at the larger apertures you would want to use for low light. The purple fringing can be worked on post process, but much less so for the bokeh chromatic aberration.

So when using the lens wide open in low light situations the lens has optical aberrations that hinder image quality. The work around, stopping down the lens to a smaller aperture, negates having the wider aperture.

A more technical issue is that with a 24 MP image sensor the sensor out resolves most consumer grade lenses. To realize the resolution the image sensor can provide you really need to buy the more expensive prosumer or pro grade lenses whose optical quality is up to the resolving power of the image sensor.

ruifo · Jul 11, 2014

I just love the 35mm f/1.8.
You will not regret if you have it.

Here are my sample shots with it, and a D5200:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157641188862373/

very worthy!

evanmyrick · Jul 12, 2014

Thanks for the help guys, I appreciate it!

Divatologist · Jul 12, 2014

I love my 35mm! You should definitely have a prime lens in your arsenal.

JoeW · Jul 12, 2014

I own this lens. It's compact, tack-sharp, focuses quickly, is very light-weight. Most prime lens will be sharper than most zoom lens of comparable focal distance. This particular lens is an under-rated bargain. And while you get wider apertures (f1.4 for instance on a Nikon 50mm I have), they're of limited utility...at f1.4 someone's eyelashes will be in focus but their eyes or nose will start to get blurred.

A couple of points to make about this lens on the "down side":
--it's a DX (which means it will perfectly with your D3200 but if you ever upgrade to full frame it's not optimal).
--It gets chromatic distortion at the extremes and when shooting in to light (translation: at f1.8 when shooting in to light you may get a green strip that appears). Many lens get some chromatic distortion at their extreme ranges but this one is a bit pronounced. You can correct it post processing, shoot at f2 or use a hood.
--it's not designed for manual focus.

Otherwise, I highly suggest you grab it. And I bought mine new from a very good independent camera shop for around $180 around 5 years ago so this price isn't something to be skeptical about. It's just a very good and very under-rated lens.

D7K · Jul 12, 2014

I'd agree with all here, If you feel you want it get one, I have one and it's a great lens.

As has been suggested if you're unsure either go test it out, or stick your kit lens at 35mm and walk around and see how you like the fixed focal length.. You won't get a feel for the 1.8-3.5 aperture range but you don't need to to have a feel of whether you think it's a length / lens you can use..

greybeard · Jul 12, 2014

I have one and it is a pretty neat little lens. What it will give you over your 18-55 is the ability to hand hold in low light and shallower DoF (depth of field(focus)) at f/2.2-2.8. I don't use f/1.8 as it is just too soft and lacks contrast but, at 2.2 and beyond, mine looks great. Cat f/3.2 portrait f/2.8

CaptainNapalm · Jul 12, 2014

You're not contemplating a $2000 lens purchase here, for $160 go for it, it will serve you as a great tool especially in low light. Being completely honest, I had this lens back in the day and wasn't overly impressed with its optical quality although it did serve me well for low light situations and the filed of view is nice on a DX camera. I also owned the 50mm f1.8 and preferred this lens much more, but you do have to stand a bit back to use it to catch enough in the frame. Anyways, word of advice; when buying this lens try to get one you can look at and try on your camera if possible. The one I bought suffered from slight back focus issues which I wasn't able to correct on my D5100, I was later able to correct these issues on my D7000 which has an auto fine tune feature allowing you to calibrate the lens precisely with your camera, I don't think your camera has that. Always better to try before you buy, but buying from Adorama I'm sure you'll get great customer service if there is any issue.

chuasam · Jul 31, 2014

in a word: Yes.
I got mine the day it came out for my D300 at the time. Loved it so much. Passed it to my dad when I got a D700.
The 50 f/1.4G which I use now sucks monkeyballs! It costs 2x the 35/1.8G and is god awful.

Tailgunner · Jul 31, 2014

I went with a 50mm 1.8D in my earlier days but I hear the 35mm 1.8 does a pretty good job. Anyhow, as mentioned above, it's only $160 new and maybe $75-100 used. So why not. Now if you got some extra cash, I would go with a Sigma 17-50mm 2.8. You can pick them up used on Ebay for $360 and and it comes with more range. I upgraded to a Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 and rarely every used my 50mm after that.

Sigma 17 50mm F2 8 EX DC OS HSM Zoom Lens for Nikon Japan Model New 0085126583552 | eBay

shadowlands · Aug 5, 2014

Yes, it's a great lens. Loved mine.

PaulWog · Aug 7, 2014

I had one. I will be buying it again.

The ~50mm equivalent full frame field of view (35mm on a Nikon crop sensor DSLR) is an essential focal length. It should be everyone's go-to first prime lens focal length. The 35mm 1.8G offers great bang for the buck. So the answer is yes, absolutely yes, buy it now.

To speak about the 35mm 1.8G a little bit: It's very sharp throughout the range. It's extremely sharp throughout the range, even at f1.8. The bokeh isn't always top-notch, but in most cases it's pretty good (I used to think it was terrible but my opinion has since changed).

I was out on vacation and I felt very sad not having a 35mm lens with my D5200. It's my favorite walk-around focal length for sure. Maybe if I moved to full frame and got a shallower depth of field, I might like a 35mm full frame equivalent field of view (about 28mm on crop), but so far 35mm is just hands down the best for me. So my opinion is yes, buy it, buy it now!!!