euua wrote:
Why it wont let me post it




there we go thank you

!!!
I want to buy that bottle!!

abam wrote:
$1679? nice snag.

love this lens.


Shipped! A great deal. I know he raised the price to $1699 and took away the free ship but still a great deal. I was very fortunate to get that deal.

I going to ask around the office where they got it

If there is one more like that I will ship it to you


DavidM5 wrote:
euua wrote:
Why it wont let me post it




there we go thank you

!!!
I want to buy that bottle!!

I know some of the Hallmark stores carry these as my wife bought me one that says "Big boys toy fund"

UPS guy just arrived

Sgt93 wrote:
UPS guy just arrived

Interested to hear your impressions.

I have only taken a few quick sample shots with it so far as I wanted to make sure it was spot on. What I can say is that I really like the focal length so far. I take more pics of the family than anything else so it is very useful. I don't have to touch the lens to their noses like I do with the 24 1.4G when I want to get close . I'm looking forward to comparison shots on a tripod of the 24, 35 and 85 to see where each lens prevails. I hope to do this soon with my D3s. I will post more when I get some more time. Will I sell one or the other? Who knows. I don't plan on it as they each have their ideal place. Only time will tell.

Just some sample shots with a Canon 5DmkII + 35mm f1.4L and a Nikon D3x + 35mm f1.4G:

Canon 5DmkII: 1/200sec, f1.4, 200 ISO


Nikon D3x: 1/100sec, f1.4, 100 ISO

Quite similar rendering. I slightly prefer the Nikkor. This isn't a real test though, so get cracking!

yes, enough of 35L jabber, the myth has been busted

I much prefer the Nikon's smoother bokeh too. Sharpness at 100% is about the same for both lenses, unlike the differences between the 85L and new Nikon 85mm F1.4G.

Interesting. The Nikon exposure if brighter, I wonder if that's the camera, the lens, or changing cloud cover?

brett maxwell wrote:
Interesting. The Nikon exposure if brighter, I wonder if that's the camera, the lens, or changing cloud cover?
I'm not sure... The shots were taken within 2 minutes of each other, and as far as I can recall, the lighting didn't change.

Perhaps some EV bias setting was on?

looks like they metered differently, nikon spot/canon matrix ?

Shaun Nyc wrote:
looks like they metered differently, nikon spot/canon matrix ?

My experience with Canon the metering is not as good. They tend to underexpose 1/3 to 2/3 i always had to dial in a + exposure compensation to save the shadows.

hey guys, so i've had the 34mm f1.4 for a little while now. awesome lens, i've been shooting everything at 1.4 just because i can and i almost always get totally usable results. it's so refreshing to go back to a 1.4 wide prime if you've been use to a f/2.8 zoom. but from what my eyes can see, the lens needs some auto-focus fine tuning unfortunately i find i have to crank it all the way to +10ish. of course, this is a bit frustrating but i'm still on the honeymoon with this lens so to speak. if i did send this lens to nikon for calibration, would i need to bring my camera in as well? that's mainly what i'm trying to figure out. i'm guessing at some point i'll get the lens calibrated.

Brody, If you love the 34 1.4, you will really love the 35 1.4

Before making micro adjustments, did you do a focus test with the camera on a tripod, using a focus target and shutter release cord or using the timer? Import to isolate the human from the process to determine if you have a focus issue. I checked my lens first thing and now my blame myself for OOF shots.

And, no you would only send Nikon the lens.

W/ L by Son V Hanoi, on Flickr
unprocess