Ok so here are a couple shots from a wedding I second shot this weekend. I used multiple lenses but all that I'm sharing here are with the new 28/1.8 AF-s G.
**Important note that all of these photo's are copyrighted to Tony DeFilippo Photography in association with Daniel McGarrity Photography **
Daniel is a very talented and generous, Baltimore based wedding photographer who uses me on occasion as a second photographer and assistant.
A couple other thoughts after a full day of constant use on the 28G, especially considering I also used a borrowed 35G during the same period...
-The size/weight delta between the two makes them almost incomparable... I generally find a heavy lens to feel good on large bodies like the D700 but after 6+ hours I MUCH preferred the 28 to the 35 just for sheer handling.
-Personal preference... I love the 35mm focal length, I find it to be very useful in cocktail hour shots where I'm getting a small group and showing interaction between people. This event was the first I've ever used the 28mm focal length and I really started to like it towards the middle of the day. I have to get closer than I am used to getting but I like how much of the environment it pulls in. This is less of a 28G vs 35G thing than a general focal length musing.
-Focus speed on the 28 seemed faster than the 35 though that is hardly a scientific test
-On the 28G I have to consciously keep my hand off the MF collar to avoid resetting or overriding the AF, this will come with time but it is annoying that you can't turn MF off completely
-1.4 on the 35G is magical looking, gorgeous bokeh, love the warmth and tone of the files...the 28G at 1.8 is pretty darned good and whether it is the focal length or the extra bit of aperture it just isn't as immediately 3D and magic looking to me
-28G is SO SHARP, especially at f/2.5 and above, probably at 1.8 its just the limitations of my own skill and narrow DOF. I didn't shoot the 35G at smaller apertures so it is tough to compare here. But it is safe for me to say that the 28G's sharpness completely satisfies me.
That is about it for now. I'm really happy with the 28G purchase.
black gaffers applied during the 1st night out hideous design BUT my only bitch with the glass....it totally rocks! ...and I'm just gonna get better with the FL, scary huh?!
This is a great idea TM, hate to have to do this on a brand spanking new lens... but the MacGyver-Alt is sometimes necessary.
Yeah, I always have some with me. 3/4" X 5" strip on the underside portion of the ring...
maybe 25% on the barrel and the balance on the grip itself. Works great, no more shots.
My 28 1.8g ships soon. I'm having second thoughts and still have a couple of days to cancel the order.
Now that a few people have had the lens. What is your opinion on it?
Is the 28 1.8G worth the 700 dollars? I've owned the Zeiss 28 .2 ZF lens and loved the colors/contrast. Was a big fan of the focal length as well. It was constantly attached on my D700. Found it really good for portrait shots close up (could focus close).
I'm primarily looking for something that can do some portraits (indoors) and landscapes as well. Is the 28 1.8G any good at landscapes?
vchowdhary wrote:
My 28 1.8g ships soon. I'm having second thoughts and still have a couple of days to cancel the order.
Now that a few people have had the lens. What is your opinion on it?
Is the 28 1.8G worth the 700 dollars? I've owned the Zeiss 28 .2 ZF lens and loved the colors/contrast. Was a big fan of the focal length as well. It was constantly attached on my D700. Found it really good for portrait shots close up (could focus close).
I'm primarily looking for something that can do some portraits (indoors) and landscapes as well. Is the 28 1.8G any good at landscapes?...Show more →
I think it's great for landscapes, although it's hard to tell much from a web-sized shot. This is a single shot HDR with +-1 EV PP images.
It handles flare and ghosts better than the Nikkor 28/2 which isn't an easy feat. I think it is worth it, especially considering the performance of the optics and AF. Try it out and see if you like it. I'm a fan.
Thanks for the input Huddy.
I saw cameralabs review of the lens and was a bit concerned about the ability of the lens for landscape shots for distant objects.
vchowdhary - I'm a fan, not sure about true landscapes with very distant horizons but check out my posts a couple pages ago from the Capitol Dome, those are as sharp as I need and uniform across the image in my opinion.
If you are comparing it to zeiss glass I'm sure you'll be able to nitpick (you should given the price of those lenses!) Do you still have that lens? I'm sure for landscape the MF doesn't slow you down at all.
shots. 
