Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LensWork" data-source="post: 5412" data-attributes="member: 1283">In the &quot;old&quot; days, the MF 35mm f/1.4 could be found in most every photojournalist's bag. It was a staple for low-light news work. Of course, back then, Tri-X pushed to 1600, or maybe 3200, was about the limit for usable low-light images, so every stop counted, and the 35mm f/1.4, while actually not very good at 1.4, was the fastest wide-angle lens available. The maximum aperture of 1.4 was also valued for the increased viewfinder brightness that aided manual focusing in low light. With the D3 &amp; D700 having ISO capabilities of 12,800 and 6400 respectively, and AF, I feel the need for this super fast lens is not what it was in the days of film. In the FX line, there is still the AF 35mm f/2.0D:[ATTACH]487[/ATTACH]At $360 new, is the extra stop, AF-S, and &quot;N&quot; coating of the f/1.4 worth $1,400 more? Not to me. If you REALLY need f/1.4, a used MF 35mm f/1.4 can be had for $350-$400.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LensWork, post: 5412, member: 1283"] In the "old" days, the MF 35mm f/1.4 could be found in most every photojournalist's bag. It was a staple for low-light news work. Of course, back then, Tri-X pushed to 1600, or maybe 3200, was about the limit for usable low-light images, so every stop counted, and the 35mm f/1.4, while actually not very good at 1.4, was the fastest wide-angle lens available. The maximum aperture of 1.4 was also valued for the increased viewfinder brightness that aided manual focusing in low light. With the D3 & D700 having ISO capabilities of 12,800 and 6400 respectively, and AF, I feel the need for this super fast lens is not what it was in the days of film. In the FX line, there is still the AF 35mm f/2.0D: [ATTACH]487._xfImport[/ATTACH] At $360 new, is the extra stop, AF-S, and "N" coating of the f/1.4 worth $1,400 more? Not to me. If you REALLY need f/1.4, a used MF 35mm f/1.4 can be had for $350-$400. [/QUOTE]

Verification