Does anyone know how the AF 35mm f/2 compares to the 24-70 @ 35mm 2.8 or the 17-35 @ 35mm 2.8? I find I'm mainly shooting in the 35 range and I was hoping to get a prime, but if the image quality of the 35 f2 isn't that great I'll just stick with the heavy zoom for now.
i use the 35/2 on fx and DX. on FX its very soft on the corners and edges at 2.8 and below - on DX it is not so bad. both the 17/35 and the 24/70 beat it hands down. Also there is very slightly more barrel distortion in the prime than there is on the 17/35
Well, I guess the lack of a 35 mm FX-lens is pretty much the same as lacking a good normal (50 mm eqv) for DX Heck, the 35 mm won't even autofocus with Nikons most selling DSLR's.
I don't know about the 35/2 AF on FX, but it is not as good as the 35/2 MF (AI/AIS) or Sigma 30/1.4 on DX. On FX, the 24-70 is totally awesome around 35 mm. Better than the 35/1.4 AIS @ f/2.8 in my opinion.
I too shoot mainly in the 35 mm range, and the 24-70 gives me everything I want (on FX). It is very large and heavy though, so I use the 35/1.4 when I want a smaller kit. I'd guess the 35/2 MF is really good too on FX, and maybe the 35/2 AF as well. But on DX, the MF lenses were better.
If you can live with a shorter lens, the 28/2.8 AIS is one of the best wide angles for Nikon FX. I've got one, and it is in many ways better than both 24-70 @ 28/2.8 and 35/1.4 @ f/2.8.
I have the 35/2 and the 24-70G. I've used them both on the D700 and D300. It's no contest. The 24-70 is superior even wide open, compared to the 35 stopped down to 2.8. The 35 is a great little lens, but comparing it to a $1600 lens that bests almost anything on the current market isn't really that fair. I like and use the 35/2 often, especially when I want to carry very light. Center sharpness is great. Contrast and colors are very nice. And I like the FL on FX and DX. But corners get a bit soft until about f4, it suffers a fair amount of CA at times, it is prone to flare(maybe worse because I have no hood for it). I haven't noticed the barrel distortion being an issue, but I haven't really looked for it in images either.
The 24-70 is just a spectacular lens if you don't mind the size, weight and price. I'm sure the 17-35 is similar but I doubt better.
The 35/2D is a great lens and you cannot compare it in the same league as those monster zooms. It is a stop faster and can fit in my pocket. Here are a few shots with it:
D700 with 35/2D @ f/5.6:
D700 with 35/2D @ f/2:
I really think it is one of the best lenses out there for both DX and FX in terms of convenience, size, price and quality.
TWoK wrote:
The 35/2D is a great lens and you cannot compare it in the same league as those monster zooms. It is a stop faster and can fit in my pocket..
Yep...
I've only used mine on DX, but it's brilliant there. Sharp and contrasty from wide-open. Also you can close focus to a little over 20cm, which can yield some terrific semi-macro shots.
I'm happy with my 35mm f/1.4 (ais) Nikkor on all of my cameras, including my D700. But if I had a fast mid-range zoom, like the 17-35mm or 24-70mm, I suppose I'd use the 35mm less.
turnert wrote:
I'm happy with my 35mm f/1.4 (ais) Nikkor on all of my cameras, including my D700. But if I had a fast mid-range zoom, like the 17-35mm or 24-70mm, I suppose I'd use the 35mm less.
~Ted
I was gonna say..... if you're not married to the idea of auto focus... I'd probably choose the 35mm f1.4 Ai-s
- I hate this lens too, because I can't take it off my D700! Probably one of the best quality lenses I've ever used and not that pricey if you look at the images wide open at f/2. I've used much more expensive lenses that wouldn't touch this one in IQ.
I've gotten fantastic results from a 35mm o.c f/2 non Ai. Had to Ai it for it to fit my D200 but it only cost me $60. My copy (at least) is very sharp wide open. It flares easy but has beautiful bokeh.
The AF 35 f/2D focuses very close (although it's not a macro it comes very close). Makes for some very interesting images.
As mentioned by a few above, the 35mm f/1.4 Ai-S is really not bad but it is MF. With its close range correction feature and the extra 1-stop speed, it makes up more for the lack of AF but it is not that inexpensive....
Heck, the 35 mm won't even autofocus with Nikons most selling DSLR's.
- I hate this lens too, because I can't take it off my D700! Probably one of the best quality lenses I've ever used and not that pricey if you look at the images wide open at f/2. I've used much more expensive lenses that wouldn't touch this one in IQ. 
.