p.7 #1 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
The Leica 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE is by far the best 35 I've owned and used. If it wasn't for eyesight issues I'd still be using it on rangefinders today. Nothing has even come close since.
p.7 #3 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
Vento wrote:
The lens is definitely too expensive for my taste at the moment, at least based on EU prices.
The Z 35/1.8 S is also available for € 729, even one euro cheaper.
Maybe I am biased because of my history.
I've been shooting analog for much longer than the majority, 35mm and medium format.
My first digital system camera is the Z6, so I've been working with vintage lenses for decades, including extremely high-quality lenses, so I'm delighted with the level of modern lenses, even if I still adapt my vintage lenses like the Canon FD 85/1.2 L, or my Tomioka 55/1.4 depending on the situation.
I have dozens of vintage lenses that cost a fraction of a Z 35/1.4, have similar flaws wide open and have a more analog, cinematic rendering.
They definitely don't have to hide from a Z 35/1.4.
When I look at the fact that a 35/2 Apo-Lanthar costs just € 300 more, but plays in a completely different league, and thanks to the floating group design, also puts the pedal to the metal in the MFD area, then € 729 is clearly too much for such a lens.
Of course, if you absolutely want f/1.4 @ 35mm and AF is an absolute must, then you may evaluate the matter differently due to a lack of alternatives.
€ 200 less at launch and I would rate the lens differently, but € 729 would definitely not be worth it to me....Show more →
Which vintage lens do you have in mind? That produce similar effects.
p.7 #4 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
I was talking about flaws, meaning optical abberations.
CA, LoCA, SA, field curvature, vignetting, vignetting bokeh effects, flares and so on, the things that characterize many vintage lenses and which some find more organic, more cinematic.
Flaws that can also be found on the Z 35/1.4 and contribute to the different look.
This also has something to do with viewing habits.
Modern lenses are not only extremely high-resolution, but at least the high-quality lenses are already extremely well corrected wide open.
Some people find the look too clean.
Especially in film/cinema, vintage optics are often used, such as the Canon FD-based K35 lenses (Alien), or Cinebloom filters such as Black Mist or Glimmerglass, to take away the digital touch from modern lenses.
Hobbit, Dune, there are many movies where a lot of effort is made to achieve a cinematic look.
Film/Cinema also like to work with strong flares, which often are absent with highly corrected lenses with the latest coatings.
With the Z 35/1.4, Nikon is taking a different approach, as is the case with many vintage lenses.
They let aberrations be aberrations and do not go down the path of achieving the highest possible resolution.
As a result, the lens is certainly much cheaper to produce, because that's exactly what costs money with a 35/1.4, because you need the most expensive types of glass, coatings, more complex constructions, which in turn means more glass and so on.
By saving on this, you can produce it cheaply and at the same time serve the market that is looking for an alternative to the f/1.8 S primes with a less clean look.
p.7 #5 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
phinix wrote:
Which vintage lens do you have in mind? That produce similar effects.
I think this is a good discussion to have because it gets us away from just the perfection of lenses today- Most of the reviews cover corner sharpness, center sharpness and compare it to other lenses. Dollar bills look like crap with the 35 lens. You can find so many Nikon/Sony/Fuji lenses etc that are built for the removal of so many flaws. I think a lot of people get drawn back to vintage glass because they want some of those flaws and creative look to their pictures.
My favorite lens of all times is extremely flawed but it would be the only lens I would keep if I had to - The 50 Summilux ASPH
Another really great example of a more vintage lens with tons of Flaws is the 50 Summilux pre-asph- Mandler 60's desgin-
Also what is probably the most fun you can have with a Leica lens, the 35 Summilux Steel Rim- Glows like a candle when shot at 1.4. Extremely flawed-
Happy to share some examples if it makes sense- Don't want to derail this thread to much.
p.7 #6 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
Got a litte more time with the lens-
Pros-
Focus is fast and hasn't missed for me- Even with fast action
Extremely light and playful. Its the first 35 1.4 with AF that hasn't felt was just to big to wanna have with me.
Really like the rendering of this lens- Structured yet smooth - Bokeh is always subjective but this has a vintage feel to me that I really appreciate
Plenty Sharp - Its not replacing your sharp landscape only lens but I would have no concerns about having this as my do it all 35 prime.
Love the images- I have really enjoyed the output of this lens. The files look great and it might be the cheapest 35 I own and is a new favorite-
PRICE- Its 600 bucks for a 35 1.4!
Cons-
No AF/MF switch- Wanted that tonight but worked around it quick enough. A switch would have been nice
Purple fringing in harsh conditions wide open- (easily fixed in post so I don't care)
Not a sexy looking lens, just a nice looking lens
More pictures below- Kids where doing laps at the local BMX race and snagged a few- All of the BMX bike pics are cropped to 50% if not more-
Love the Z6_3/35-1.4 combo-
Self Portrait from the wife-
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/40s100 ISO+1.0 EV
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/2000s1800 ISO+1.0 EV
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/2000s2500 ISO+1.0 EV
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/2000s1800 ISO+1.0 EV
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/2000s3200 ISO+1.0 EV
I just like this shot of my son- This lens punches above its weight for people IMO
NIKON Z6_3NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 lens35mmf/1.41/8000s360 ISO0.0 EV
p.7 #7 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
RustyRus wrote:
Got a litte more time with the lens-
Pros-
Focus is fast and hasn't missed for me- Even with fast action
Extremely light and playful. Its the first 35 1.4 with AF that hasn't felt was just to big to wanna have with me.
Really like the rendering of this lens- Structured yet smooth - Bokeh is always subjective but this has a vintage feel to me that I really appreciate
Plenty Sharp - Its not replacing your sharp landscape only lens but I would have no concerns about having this as my do it all 35 prime.
Love the images- I have really enjoyed the output of this lens. The files look great and it might be the cheapest 35 I own and is a new favorite-
PRICE- Its 600 bucks for a 35 1.4!
Cons-
No AF/MF switch- Wanted that tonight but worked around it quick enough. A switch would have been nice
Purple fringing in harsh conditions wide open- (easily fixed in post so I don't care)
Not a sexy looking lens, just a nice looking lens
More pictures below- Kids where doing laps at the local BMX race and snagged a few- All of the BMX bike pics are cropped to 50% if not more-
Thanks for your posts and comments. I have reconsidered my position to pass and have a copy coming in Tuesday for evaluation. I may be able to live with the nits and the hit on resolution in return for maximum AF capability on a Z7II (something I value highly). My acid test is the low light run and gun where the Z7II is challenged. I know, get a Z8 but I do like, no love the IQ and ergonomics, size, weight, battery, DR......of my Z7II (with Small Rig). I have the 50 1.8S if I need the sharp sharp. Might in the end make a better combination for me. I am on a mission to reduce the chunk factor, including adapted lenses. The 105 1.4 may be my only adapted lens going forward.
At a minimum, the issues against the 35 can be fixed easily in Post. The only pause for me is the soap bubble thing but not a show stopper. I am spoiled right now with the Tamron 35 1.4 bokeh. Just perfection, but a chunky monkey to be sure. At least it knocks out the clinical look of the 35 1.8, something I could not bear. For some reason I find the 50 1.8s less clinical and more pleasing on a Z7II (but not so much on a 24MP camera). The blend of these 2 lenses (50 1.8S, 35 1.4 Z) close in focal lengths but different characteristics, is starting to rev me up a bit. The 40 is also a player here but it ultimately fails my AF testing on the Z7II. Not a good run and gun lens in low light sorry to say, but apparently has very similar IQ.
In a previous set of tests, the 35 1.8S was best in class for squeezing out maximum AF capability of a Z7II (that would be true of all 3 1.8 S lenses, 35/50/85) The key right now is to see how the 35 1.4 image cleans up in POST. The video by Matt Irwin had a nice section on that. I find 35mm images to be easier to manage in Post so am hopeful I can overcome any irregularities. The takeaway here is that the native character of this lens is pleasing and compliments a sharp well corrected lens for other purposes. The Ricci video made this point and was what convinced me to reconsider. I may just have to keep the Tamron (on the shelf) for those special shots where I need that extra correction. I realize what I desire in a 35 will never be managed with 1 lens. And I am not a 1.2 aperture, bulky lens, extreme bokeh fan, not looking for that solution either.
p.7 #10 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
35mm f/2D?
phinix wrote:
Do you guys think that rumored new 50mm 1.4 will be a bit smaller and lighter than this 35mm?
In the past all fifties were smaller than 35mm.
p.7 #11 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
RustyRus wrote:
Got a litte more time with the lens-
Pros-
Focus is fast and hasn't missed for me- Even with fast action
Extremely light and playful. Its the first 35 1.4 with AF that hasn't felt was just to big to wanna have with me.
Really like the rendering of this lens- Structured yet smooth - Bokeh is always subjective but this has a vintage feel to me that I really appreciate
Plenty Sharp - Its not replacing your sharp landscape only lens but I would have no concerns about having this as my do it all 35 prime.
Love the images- I have really enjoyed the output of this lens. The files look great and it might be the cheapest 35 I own and is a new favorite-
PRICE- Its 600 bucks for a 35 1.4!
Cons-
No AF/MF switch- Wanted that tonight but worked around it quick enough. A switch would have been nice
Purple fringing in harsh conditions wide open- (easily fixed in post so I don't care)
Not a sexy looking lens, just a nice looking lens
More pictures below- Kids where doing laps at the local BMX race and snagged a few- All of the BMX bike pics are cropped to 50% if not more-
p.7 #13 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
phinix wrote:
1.4
I was referring to your comment that in the past, "all fifties were smaller than 35mm." This is generally true, though Nikon focused on making small cheap 50s during much of the AF era so I think that could be a part of it (AF-S G lenses for sure).
Point taken though, and in the interest of optimism I'd love to see a z-mount 50mm f/1.4 as compact as possible.
p.7 #16 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
Those are great examples of real world usage at typical camera to subject distances that perfectly highlight what this lens will do foliage in the bokeh.
I think if Nikon put an S Plena label on the lens or some other clever marketing and charged 1800 bucks- It would be paraded around.
I am shocked at how much I am enjoying this lens. It really feels like a vintage lens to me when I am working with the files but in practical use, to AF is really nice sometimes.
When I actually have some free time, I am going to real world compare it to the Leica 35 Summilux ASPH and the Leica 35 Summilux pre-asph versions.
Curious how the looks will compare in real world testing.
p.7 #19 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
RustyRus wrote:
I think if Nikon put an S Plena label on the lens or some other clever marketing and charged 1800 bucks- It would be paraded around.
I am shocked at how much I am enjoying this lens. It really feels like a vintage lens to me when I am working with the files but in practical use, to AF is really nice sometimes.
When I actually have some free time, I am going to real world compare it to the Leica 35 Summilux ASPH and the Leica 35 Summilux pre-asph versions.
Curious how the looks will compare in real world testing.
p.7 #20 · Official Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.4 Image Thread
aerospace99 wrote:
In a previous set of tests, the 35 1.8S was best in class for squeezing out maximum AF capability of a Z7II (that would be true of all 3 1.8 S lenses, 35/50/85) The key right now is to see how the 35 1.4 image cleans up in POST. The video by Matt Irwin had a nice section on that. I find 35mm images to be easier to manage in Post so am hopeful I can overcome any irregularities. The takeaway here is that the native character of this lens is pleasing and compliments a sharp well corrected lens for other purposes. The Ricci video made this point and was what convinced me to reconsider. I may just have to keep the Tamron (on the shelf) for those special shots where I need that extra correction. I realize what I desire in a 35 will never be managed with 1 lens. And I am not a 1.2 aperture, bulky lens, extreme bokeh fan, not looking for that solution either. ...Show more →
Received the 35 last night and so far a few points as I ran indoor and a few outdoor comparisons against the Tamron 35 1.4 and Nikon 40 f2. The 35 1.4 performed as good as I had hoped but had no AF advantage over the Tamron which surprised me a bit. That tells me that the Tamron is quite good and I was being too hard on it (and the 40 which also held its own) but that in the end, the 35 1.8S may be best in class keeper rate on a low light AF using eye focus situation. I no longer have a copy of 35 1.8S lens so am going by previous comparisons to the Tamron and 40mm. The Z7II AF capability is the limiting factor here but I live with that. I did not see some of the irregularities in nervous bokeh or massive soap bubble effects but have only started to evaluate the lens. Overall resolution is acceptable wide open. I am early of course in evaluating this lens but first impressions is that it will replace the 40 as I want the extra stop. The Tamron will go to the shelf but its possible it will not get much use as I really do not want to haul this lens with my 105 and 50 1.8s. So it looks like it is a go......glad I reconsidered.
Like Scott, I did learn through this thread that the 35GM is the lens to get if you want best in class resolution etc. but I would suggest the 35 1.8S may be your best event lens for AF, I just think it renders too clinical for my taste. The 35 1.4Z definitely has the vintage flair to it which I like. In my workflows it can be tightened up quite nicely to where you could not tell it apart from the Tamron in many cases. But at 1.4 SOOC the Tamron wins as expected. Stopped down, the 35 1.4Z catches up very nicely. YMMV.
