Need Opinions on this lens

[frtorres87]

So I've been looking at purchasing another lens, as I've gotten very comfortable with my kit 18-55mm lens. This is the lens I had in mind.

Amazon.com: Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: NIKON: Camera & Photo

First, I hear this is a good "walk around lens", but I feel like the 18-55mm lens was a good "walk around lense" so how does it compare? What's the difference?

Second, the 35mm lense I'm interested in doesn't have VR, as I am a beginner I don't think I have the steadiest hands. But then again I've never used a lens without VR, so how much of a con is it that this lens doesn't have VR?

​thanks to anyone's feedback.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

It is a prime lens and they are generally sharper. The 1.8 is a lot faster and that will let you shoot in lower light. As far a VR I doubt you will really miss it with that fast of a lens. just keep your shutter speed up to at least 1/30 or above.

that being said why do you want the lens since you already have a lens that covers that range. I am not saying it is a bad thing, I just wanted to know your rational for buying it,

 

[crashton]

You'll be happy with the 35 f1.8. It's a tack sharp lens & the best deal going on a sharp prime lens.

 

[frtorres87]

It is a prime lens and they are generally sharper. The 1.8 is a lot faster and that will let you shoot in lower light. As far a VR I doubt you will really miss it with that fast of a lens. just keep your shutter speed up to at least 1/30 or above.

that being said why do you want the lens since you already have a lens that covers that range. I am not saying it is a bad thing, I just wanted to know your rational for buying it,

My desire to purchase this lens would be for sharper image quality. For what I've read this lens will produce better image quality. But feedback and opinions are welcomed. Would I be better off spend the money on someone else?

 

[WhiteLight]

I have the 18-55 & the 35 1.8
I've noticed that i prefer the 18-55 over the 35 anyday unless i am shooting portraits.
Somehow i feel very limited by the fixed focal length.
it is an awesome lens & picture quality is fantastic, no doubt about that.. but on a dx camera, i think even the 35mm isn't close enough especially indoors.
That's just me though.. am sure there are lots of people here who can live just with the 35

 

[frtorres87]

I have the 18-55 & the 35 1.8
I've noticed that i prefer the 18-55 over the 35 anyday unless i am shooting portraits.
Somehow i feel very limited by the fixed focal length.
it is an awesome lens & picture quality is fantastic, no doubt about that.. but on a dx camera, i think even the 35mm isn't close enough especially indoors.
That's just me though.. am sure there are lots of people here who can live just with the 35

Thank u very much for your response, I am toying around with the idea of getting a 55-300 lens. Specifically for taking pics of animals as they tend to run away the closer you get, the 18-55mm isn't cutting it for that. Would that be more practically considering that I already have the 18-55mm then purchasing the 35mm?

 

[crycocyon]

It is an outstanding lens for the DX format. The image in the viewfinder will be significantly brighter. You'll have much greater flexibility in terms of shutter speed given the wider apertures over the 18-55. It is going to make the photographic process more focused on the subject and less on what zoom you want to use. And you don't need VR with a lens like this. Although I don't have one, I've read that the focus is very fast (faster than the 18-55?). You'll have more light to play with, you'll have beautifully shallow depths of field to make the subjects "pop" more. It is more compact. If you are comfortable with the 18-55, this lens will become another good friend to carry along. It isn't a replacement, it is an excellent and capable companion to the 18-55. I love the 18-55 but I also wanted to have a fast prime for my D7000. At the time I ended up getting the 50 mm 1.4 G since I had planned to get an FX camera, but that 50 mm works great as a portrait lens on the D7000. I'm sure the 35 1.8 performs just as well in terms of sharpness.

 

[WhiteLight]

Thank u very much for your response, I am toying around with the idea of getting a 55-300 lens. Specifically for taking pics of animals as they tend to run away the closer you get, the 18-55mm isn't cutting it for that. Would that be more practically considering that I already have the 18-55mm then purchasing the 35mm?

The 55-300 is a great lens too.
If you need reach greater than what the 18-55 affords, the 55-300 will make you very happy.
The IQ is wonderful & to shoot animals you would definitely need the longer lens.
Again, lot of people here have the 55-300 and have taken some amazing pictures with it.
I have the 70-300 and love it to bits

 

[snaphappy]

I'm still learning too but I have both the 35mm and the 70-300mm. Depends on what you are missing with the 18-55mm. I rarely use my 18-55mm now unless I'm wanting the 18mm for landscapes etc. The 35mm is very fast so kids runnjing playing is easy to freeze and capture because its so quick. Inside the house or where it's rather dim well definately want my 35mm. I got this advice when looking at lenses and so will pass it on. Put your lens on 35mm and don't move it while shooting (you'll have to move your feet). Can you get all the pics you want? Then try 50mm and do the same thing.
If what you are really missing is extra reach well then you have your answer and know which lenses you want to look at next. I love my 70-300mm

 

[frtorres87]

I'm still learning too but I have both the 35mm and the 70-300mm. Depends on what you are missing with the 18-55mm. I rarely use my 18-55mm now unless I'm wanting the 18mm for landscapes etc. The 35mm is very fast so kids runnjing playing is easy to freeze and capture because its so quick. Inside the house or where it's rather dim well definately want my 35mm. I got this advice when looking at lenses and so will pass it on. Put your lens on 35mm and don't move it while shooting (you'll have to move your feet). Can you get all the pics you want? Then try 50mm and do the same thing.
If what you are really missing is extra reach well then you have your answer and know which lenses you want to look at next. I love my 70-300mm

Awesome advice! How easy or difficult is it to achieve Bokeh with the 35mm?

 

[Eye-level]

As a general rule...with a wide angle you do not need to worry about VR...everything is going to be in focus and you'll have plenty of DOF and shutter speed room especially with 1.8...wide angle = no need for VR...simple as that!

Yes the 35 would make for a great walk around lens...so does the 18-55...what you have to ask yourself is what kind of photography do you want to do and what sort of focal length do you need to do it...

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

My desire to purchase this lens would be for sharper image quality. For what I've read this lens will produce better image quality. But feedback and opinions are welcomed. Would I be better off spend the money on someone else?

Tack sharp is a good reason. I have a 40mm macro and I love that lens and not just for macro. It is a 2.8 so it is a little faster but there is a difference in sharpness.

The idea of a longer lens is nice also. I have the 55-200 and I really use it more than I do my 18-55 and would not want to do without it.

Big decision you have to make. One thing you need to consider is how you are using your photos. Mostly online, regular size prints? You may not need the sharpness as much as you think you do, Also how are you post processing skills? A lot of sharpness is lost because people don't know how to get all the sharpness out of a photo that is hidden in there.

Have fun making the decision.

 

[snaphappy]

easy even I figured it out

 

[frtorres87]

Okay, so I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the Nikon 40mm Micro lens. It's a good walk around lens, and it's a good macro lens. Also seems to produce decent Bokeh. If I have time I'll pick it up tonight and give my impressions on it.

 

[jwstl]

Okay, so I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the Nikon 40mm Micro lens. It's a good walk around lens, and it's a good macro lens. Also seems to produce decent Bokeh. If I have time I'll pick it up tonight and give my impressions on it.

I'm sure it's a good macro if you can live with the very short working distance. To get 1:1 you have to be 1 inch away from the subject. That's just not enough for me. I would get the 35 because it's faster and get a longer macro when funds allow. It's what I have for my D7000....the 35 and a 105 macro.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Marcel]

I'm sure it's a good macro if you can live with the very short working distance. To get 1:1 you have to be 1 inch away from the subject. That's just not enough for me. I would get the 35 because it's faster and get a longer macro when funds allow. It's what I have for my D7000....the 35 and a 105 macro.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

The thing you must not forget is that when you have to get the front of your lens too close to the thing you want to photograph, you are cutting the light hitting that object/but or whatever. And try to approach insects… This is the reason I prefer the 105mm for a macro.

 

[Moab Man]

I have both the 35mm and the 55-300mm you're considering. The two cannot be compared as to which you should choose. Vanilla or chocolate. The 35mm is very sharp and works great in low light shooting. The 55-300mm is for that reach out and touch something capability.

Opinion: I would want the 35mm first because it really taught me how incredibly capable this camera is with good glass. Made me fall in love with my camera all over.

Next, give me the 55-300mm. Having saw how capable the camera is I can confidently shoot with this lens and not feel disappointed that shots aren't as sharp as I thought they would be in my minds eye - it's the glass.

Many have told you that it depends on what you like to shoot. At this point, for me, I haven't found something specific. To paraphrase the Joker from the Batman movie, I'm a dog chasing cars and wouldn't know what to do if I caught one. Meaning, i haven't found my "voice" yet and love to shoot it all! I am in awe of what we can capture with this camera so for now I will keep chasing all the cars. Eventually I'm sure I will find my voice and will steer my lens purchases in a specific direction.

​I suspect you're the other person on "Newbie Road" figuring out where you will eventually turn - I wave back to you and say hello.

 

[frtorres87]

I must say, you guys are amazing on this forum. Good feedback, very helpful, and no disrespect. I ended up purchasing the Nikon 40mm Micro Nikkor. Today i went on a little shoot and tested the lens out, I have to say its a fantastic lens. Its autofocus is very nice/fast and I like the ability to be able to dial the focus in myself even when its on Auto. Its got a great build quality and macro ability is a nice addition. Overall im extremely happy with my purchase. Here are a few shots from today.

 

[Curt]

I too have the 70-300mm and I love it. It's your best bet, it does cost more, but well worth it. I had the 55-200mm but sold it. The 70-300mm is much better. As to the 18-55mm lens for the price hard to beat. Great for all around use. Other lens you might want to look at is the 50mm 1.8 very sharp and the cost is unbeatable( very good value).

 

[SkvLTD]

Well, if 60mm reach/frame does it for you, great.