35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
end

caribrob
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #1 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

I am about to shoot a wedding in Italy and wanted to add a 35mm prime to my lens line up.

D300
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.4
24-70 2.8

Do you recommend the:

Nikon 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor AI-S Manual Focus - US$550

or the

Nikon 35mm f/2D AF - US$340

I don't mind manual focus.

THANK YOU
Rob

Oct 11, 2008 at 07:42 PM

phillip ino
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #2 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

If you don't mind MF then go with the 1.4 - you cannot replace the look that lens offers with the 35/2.

Oct 11, 2008 at 07:49 PM

xof711
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

I would def. get the 35mm f/1.4!!! Esp. at $550!! This glass sells for around $800 still.
If I remember correctly, that lens has Close Range Correction (CRC) system, so you can take high quality photos even at minimum focusing distance.

------
DigitalFreak.net

Oct 11, 2008 at 07:56 PM

jkittmer
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #4 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

What are you hoping to gain by adding this lens? Is it just the faster aperture? It looks to me like you are covered with the 24-70. I personally feel you may be lacking more on the longer end since you would have some overlap by adding a 35... off topic but I would consider a second body if you don't have one and put the 24-70 on one and the 85 on another. On a crop body I would prefer something wider than 35 and the 24-70 would give you that extra wideness (with the sacrifice of some speed of course).

Sorry I didn't answer your question but that is what I would do but everyone is different so good luck...

Oct 11, 2008 at 11:44 PM

Avi B
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #5 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

The above post makes a lot of sense.

But the 35 f/1.4 is really nice too! Here are some pics I had taken with it.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/693546/0

Oct 12, 2008 at 12:01 AM

Taylor Barrett
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #6 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

xof711 wrote:
I would def. get the 35mm f/1.4!!! Esp. at $550!! This glass sells for around $800 still.
If I remember correctly, that lens has Close Range Correction (CRC) system, so you can take high quality photos even at minimum focusing distance.

------
DigitalFreak.net

There's one here on FM for less than $300...

Oct 12, 2008 at 12:41 AM

Mark Kenfield
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #7 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

I'd say it depends on how good you are at MF with the D300. Personally, without a MF screen and a magnifying eyepiece on the D300 I can't MF accurately enough to feel comfortable using it for paid work. So I'd stick to the 35mm f/2 (which is a wonderful lens on the D300).

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is an excellent option for an AF lens at that sort of focal length. Not sure on the pricing on it though.

Oct 12, 2008 at 01:06 AM

90 5.0
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #8 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

On a side note a lot of old slr shooters that loved the 50's need the 35 to get their 50 back on a dx dslr.

I past up a 35/2 the other day used at my local shop for 200.00, i am still kicking myself.

But I have a 28 2.8 ais for my wide shots and I don't need the speed for most of my work..

Oct 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM

caribrob
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #9 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

THANK YOU everyone for your valuable advice.

jkittmer - you are right on the 2nd body - the idea is to purchase a D700 as soon as cash flow allows in which case I would have a DX and an FX. My ideal lens set up is to have a decent collection of quality primes and the 24-70 as an extra. I don't really need anything over 85mm.

AVI - great images, will try to imitate some of the stuff you have done there.

Taylor - txs for the tip I actually went for the f/2.

Mark - had not thought the MF thing through too well, nice one, txs for that - I guess I went safe with the f/2. Probably unjustifiably so I tend to stick with Nikon gear...

In case anyone is interested - what might have added to my decision to go for the f/2 is that one of my favorite PJ is using the f/2: http://www.pepbonet.com/technotes.html
Also I could get the f/2 new for $340 and the f/1.4 for $550 second hand - did not want to take a risk.

I came accross an interesting site I think worth mentioning:

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/

regards
Rob

Oct 12, 2008 at 06:14 PM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #10 · 35mm f/2 or 35mm f/1.4

Mark Kenfield wrote:
Personally, without a MF screen and a magnifying eyepiece on the D300 I can't MF accurately enough to feel comfortable using it for paid work.

Me too, it's just not made for it in its stock form. Silly focusing screen.

Oct 12, 2008 at 08:13 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload end