vaptre wrote:
Last time I sold 35/1.4g for 28/1.4e. But! Now I’m at the same situation like Elijah many years ago. 28/1.4 is not a replacement for 24/35 pair at all. It’s a great lens! 100% sure but it’s not a replacement. Because 35mm definitely looks more natural. It can be generic lens for travels and portraits and 28/1.4 is not. 28 mm is a specific lens for cinematic kind of view for streets and some portraits. But our eyes so quickly understand that something is different. But with 35mm.. it’s like a real world. Sometimes it’s boring. There are no any challenges for the viewers. No wow effects because of unusual FOV but it’s kinda magic that you can see a real life here.
So I definitely would rather have 24/28/35 at the same time than replace them with each other. ...Show more →
I hear you, and agree with most of what you say. Difference is that I don’t find 35mm to be boring at all. It is a focal length that is so good at not getting in the way because it just feels natural, and helps you bring out the subject, but not about the lens screaming out for attention. Wow should always come from the subject and how we cook them. Lens wow wears out, becomes a criche quickly, Like the miniature look achieved by tilt lens, etc.
My personal problem is
1. I have 35/1.8S and happy with 90% of what I shoot.
2. For the 10% of time I would love to have one special lens. Candidates are 35/1.2S or 35/1.4 G. Just one, not both.
3. I have two zooms (14-30 f4s, 24-70 f4s) and one MF (contax Zeiss 28mm/f2.8) covering 28mm. It does cover, once again 90% of the shots. I am very curious to have one special wide angle lens.
4. For that one special wide angle lens, I can’t quite decide whether that is a 28/1.4 or 24/1.4 or 21/1.4 or 14/1.4. I am slowly leaning toward 28mm/1.4 as my interest for such lens is NOT astro, but for environmental portraits and landscape setting. 21/1.4 or 14/1.4 would require close up to visually notice the oof area only possible with fast lens, while with 28mm, it has wider range of use.
So, it may become 28/1.4 G and 35/1.4G. But, I still struggle with the self imposed rule of no more F mount. I will have fun time sort this dilemma out.
The 28 1.4e is a special lens and one I wish I had kept. I used to often use 1.2 crop mode to frame it closer to a 35mm FOV. Alas my issue similar to yours was at the 50mm FL and I have the 50 1.8s and the 58 1.4g.
I wish I had kept the 28 but can’t justify re-acquiring it for the the used price when I won’t use it much.
In addition to the characteristics mentioned in the previous posts, I also like the color this lens produces. Stepping it down, it can produce very nice landscaping images. For my own usage, it's my go-to lens with my D810. I use it more often that 58/1.4G.
akul wrote:
I hear you, and agree with most of what you say. Difference is that I don’t find 35mm to be boring at all. It is a focal length that is so good at not getting in the way because it just feels natural, and helps you bring out the subject, but not about the lens screaming out for attention. Wow should always come from the subject and how we cook them. Lens wow wears out, becomes a criche quickly, Like the miniature look achieved by tilt lens, etc.
My personal problem is
1. I have 35/1.8S and happy with 90% of what I shoot.
2. For the 10% of time I would love to have one special lens. Candidates are 35/1.2S or 35/1.4 G. Just one, not both.
3. I have two zooms (14-30 f4s, 24-70 f4s) and one MF (contax Zeiss 28mm/f2.8) covering 28mm. It does cover, once again 90% of the shots. I am very curious to have one special wide angle lens.
4. For that one special wide angle lens, I can’t quite decide whether that is a 28/1.4 or 24/1.4 or 21/1.4 or 14/1.4. I am slowly leaning toward 28mm/1.4 as my interest for such lens is NOT astro, but for environmental portraits and landscape setting. 21/1.4 or 14/1.4 would require close up to visually notice the oof area only possible with fast lens, while with 28mm, it has wider range of use.
So, it may become 28/1.4 G and 35/1.4G. But, I still struggle with the self imposed rule of no more F mount. I will have fun time sort this dilemma out.
For f/1.4 F mount lenses, 24/1.4G, 58/1.4G, and 85/1.4G are more character lenses to me as 28/1.4E and 105/1.4E are full general purpose lenses. I consider and use the 35/1.4G as it has both gentle characters and modern colors. I do have the 35/1.8S lens and I really like it but it's has a very different signatures, modern rendering with clean/clear color.
24/1.4 G is such an old lens, and still costing about the same as 28/1.4G. It is hard to go that far. I am in no way searching for the ‘old look’. To me, 58/1.4G is just q unique lens, and I don’t consider old style rendering. 35 may be older as it is an older design,but I like Sato san’s design, so there is a certain consistency. I much prefer the modern 28/1.4 rendition than 24/1.4 G from the limited samples I have seen. If I go with 24/1.4, it probably won’t be a Nikon.
vaptre wrote:
Last time I sold 35/1.4g for 28/1.4e. But! Now I’m at the same situation like Elijah many years ago. 28/1.4 is not a replacement for 24/35 pair at all. It’s a great lens! 100% sure but it’s not a replacement. Because 35mm definitely looks more natural. It can be generic lens for travels and portraits and 28/1.4 is not. 28 mm is a specific lens for cinematic kind of view for streets and some portraits. But our eyes so quickly understand that something is different. But with 35mm.. it’s like a real world. Sometimes it’s boring. There are no any challenges for the viewers. No wow effects because of unusual FOV but it’s kinda magic that you can see a real life here.
So I definitely would rather have 24/28/35 at the same time than replace them with each other. ...Show more →
Yup, 100% agree with you. I just got bombarded with 24 likes on this image thread so I had to see what's up
I gave up Nikon years ago but I do miss their lenses. 35G, 58G and 105E were my favorite...
I'm seriously thinking about switching back but only for the amazing ZF that just came out.
Decisions decisions. Although it will be hard getting rid of my Canon 200mm f/2.0L
Elijah wrote:
Yup, 100% agree with you. I just got bombarded with 24 likes on this image thread so I had to see what's up
I gave up Nikon years ago but I do miss their lenses. 35G, 58G and 105E were my favorite...
I'm seriously thinking about switching back but only for the amazing ZF that just came out.
Decisions decisions. Although it will be hard getting rid of my Canon 200mm f/2.0L
Welcome back Elijah! You know Nikon has the amazing Plena 135 to tide you over for a few years. You can also use an adapter for Canon? Who knows, 200mm /f2S maybe in their lab, waiting for approval, it may be just a matter of time.
In the nikon facebook user group a user had a conversation with Mr. Sato and was told that the Z 35mm 1.8 was also designed by him. https://cameragossip.github.io/nikon-lens-patents.html
Also at this site Mr. Satos name is mentioned under Z 35mm 1.8
Just very interesting that he didn't seem to have as much freedom designing this lens as with the 58mm and 105mm 1.4
akul wrote:
Interesting, but his post is unclear who designed 35/1.8S. He just says they are both designed, it no mention by who in this post.
Regardless, I own and really enjoy 35/1.8S. No issue with its rendering or sharpness for my use. But, it is not 1.4, and I miss that for a certain shot. I thought I were waiting for the 35/1.2 S, but obviously, it willl be another behemoth and fund sucker. Nikon refurbished 35/1.4 G is sold at $ 1,200 and I know prices will only go one direction. I wait till 35/1.2 is unveiled, then make a decision. This thread is definitely NOT helping!
I've always liked the rendering and color of this lens. and the other day I saw this lens on sale at a magical price of about $ 650. new. a second of thought and now he has already been delivered to me. probably this purchase is very impulsive and not rational, because I already have a magnificent tamron 35 /1.4 and nikon 28/1.4, but the pleasure of owning the desired thing is much higher than rational thoughts. Moreover, this lens is from the glorious Nikon line, whose frames are endowed with soul, although technically imperfect. That's exactly what I like about 58 /1.4, 105 /1.4 and now 35 /1.4. Unfortunately, the clinically clean line of s optics disappointed me.
Alexander Ross wrote:
I've always liked the rendering and color of this lens. and the other day I saw this lens on sale at a magical price of about $ 650. new. a second of thought and now he has already been delivered to me. probably this purchase is very impulsive and not rational, because I already have a magnificent tamron 35 /1.4 and nikon 28/1.4, but the pleasure of owning the desired thing is much higher than rational thoughts. Moreover, this lens is from the glorious Nikon line, whose frames are endowed with soul, although technically imperfect. That's exactly what I like about 58 /1.4, 105 /1.4 and now 35 /1.4. Unfortunately, the clinically clean line of s optics disappointed me.
GoroMajima wrote:
In the nikon facebook user group a user had a conversation with Mr. Sato and was told that the Z 35mm 1.8 was also designed by him. https://cameragossip.github.io/nikon-lens-patents.html
Also at this site Mr. Satos name is mentioned under Z 35mm 1.8
Just very interesting that he didn't seem to have as much freedom designing this lens as with the 58mm and 105mm 1.4
Thank you for that link. It is quite informative with all designer’s name on the patent listed out. Regarding the 35/1.8S, Sato’s name is with among others possibly from Konica Minolta ans it was a joint filing. It makes me think that he probably played more role of a director than a designer. For 35/1.4G, it is just his name and none others.
I don't love the bulkyness and weight with the FTZ Adapter, far preferred the Sony 35mm 1.4 Gm when I used Sony - handling wise.. also the autofocus.
But the Nikon rendering is just so so good, I don't know any AF 35mm which takes so dreamy pictures.
Maybe RX1Rii Sonnar? Or Sigma 35mm 1.2, but that thing is even heavier.
RoamingScott wrote:
Practicing manually focusing, it's soooo easy on this lens.
Looks like you are off to a great start with this lens. It is great to see the evolution of its ownership on this thread, showing the different genres in which it can shine.
I have been tempted to conclude that the f/1.4G primes have acceptable manual focusing capabilities based on a sample of 3(35, 58, and 105mm). The forgettable one being the 50mm and still to sample 24 and 85mm.
