35mm f2 - anyone using one? what's it like?

kp-pix

Hi

Since I bought my 60mm 2.8, I have fallen out of love completely with zooms of any kind. I bought this after being told that the 50mm's just weren't delivering the goods and I have zero fault with the 60mm. Anyway, I find that I prefer to move around a composition than do the rest. I was considering the 85mm for portraits, but I find the 60mm is a better performer this way than I expected, so it will only give me more distance away from the subject, but the subjects don't seem to mind at all. I know the 85mm 1.4 is exceptional, but I am just not feeling I need it. But I do mutter about a wide.

I have read some really good reviews to date, the vignetting doesn't exist, it's dof is great etc etc but would like to see from someone who has one first, if you do have one that is

Thanks in advance!

GroovyGeek

That discussion probably does not belong in a for sale board, but here we go anyway:

85/1.4 is great for portraits, among other things, because of its great performance wide open, and its extremely shallow DOF. It is probably good for studio work, but as an event lens or for shooting in an informal setting I think that it would be too long, especially on a 1.5x crop sensor. I certainly find 50mm too long for shooting around my house.

The next best thing portrait-wise may be the 50/1.4. It is about equivalent to a 75/1.4 at 1.5x crop, and performance at f/1.4 is good, and great by 1.8. I would stay away from the 50/1.8 for this type of work, because it is quite soft at f/1.8 and does not match the 50/1.4 until around f/4.

35mm is about the right focal length at 1.5x crop for people shots for me, and the 35/2 is the best you can get from Nikon in their AF flavors, unless you are willing to shell out $2k+ for the 28/1.4 :-). The lens is fine from a perspective point of view, but you loose the shallow DOF to an extent because of the short focal length. If you want shallower DOF you can try the 35/1.4 (used), but it is MF and you will need a body that supports AI metering or use manual mode. I personally would be a bit uneasy with MF at f/1.4, but people used to do it so I am sure that with enough practice one can learn.

Sigma makes a 30/1.4 AF HSM, I don't know much about the lens.

DoctorIt

GroovyGeek wrote:

That discussion probably does not belong in a for sale board, but here we go anyway:

I totally agree


moved to the gear discussion forum, where more people will chime in

kp-pix

Oh sorry and thanks for moving it. Thick as ten bricks when I have a cold.

Thanks a lot Groovygeek!! I have seen some awesome work with that 85 and if I was a rich woman, I would certainly buy it and many other toys. I am trying to be as practical as possible, but still offer the best possible technically.

OK, so with this lost DOF, understandable at that length - I have read it is very sharp - can some of that DOF lost be compensated for in post-processing?

I know what you mean regarding the MF. I used to have an F3, an old 35 and the awesome 105! It was great, in my 20's lol but match that with my 40 year old wobble and it isn't a good look lol - which is why I shifted everything to digital, keep up with the times and the age!!!!

Oh and with sigma lenses on a Nikon body. When I was looking into wides a few months ago - the 10-20 actually before I bought my 60mm, it was mentioned that they don't operate well on a D200. I have a D80 but that bothered me so I haven't looked into them further. Do they work just as fine?

Seymore

OK... Thanks for adding the cam you're using in your profile.

Well, as was mentioned above, the 35 is ~52.5mm full frame (FF). So if you're stuck on primes, as I am, you'll find the 35 a nice range. I currently use a MF (Russian) MIR37H 35/2 and find it a great length. Keep in mind that the wider you go, the pricier it will get. I can tell you that the 85/1.8D (~127mm FF) is a sweeeeet lens. And like the 60/2.8, the 85 is another lens I'll keep in my stable for some time to come. Another you may want to consider is the 24/2.8 (36mm FF). If you need wider than this, there is the 20/2.8D. But all of this depends on what you shoot and the range you need.

I know everyone is different, but I'm really starting to luv my D200 and the AI/AIS MF lenses I've collected. If you do landscapes or still life, they are hard to beat. But if you're trying to follow a moving subject, the AF/AFS lenses are the way to go...

BTW... sorry, can't really speak to any of the wider 3rd party AF glass... other than the AF Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 which I'm happy with at this time.



HTH...

z_28

Some time ago I developed some kind of "walking set" -
20D later 30D, 70-200/2.8L later IS and 35/2
Very handy and versatile.
35/2 is called hidden gem and it is.
Small, sharp, light, non-expensive - what's more to add ?
Recommended

kp-pix

Hi Seymore and thanks for responding!

This 60mm/2.8 really has surpassed my expectations. I shoot weddings/portraits in the outdoors/festival events/parades and street and basically bought it for the flower/reception items due to the micro and the 2.8 for low light, whilst aiming for the 85 and a 10-20 next big purchase. But it has kicked butt as a general walk around, surprisingly (to the standrd of my photography that I aspire to from myself) except for the width, but only at certain times. Like, when riding in the back of a limo, or being stuck on a cruise ship which probably won't happen again, but that was the only thing I was muttering about, other than that the 60 worked a treat! I know I could use something wider for effect but it wouldn't be something I use a lot and I am not a fan of changing lenses too often as I like to concentrate on what I am doing.

I think I will just head that way with the 35mm and keep the 85 as a wishlist/one day item.

Thank you very much! Plus, I do love taking the odd landscape (who doesn't) so I doubt it will be a waste.

z_28

Thank you! Not much more to add, now off to study the budget