35mm Nikkors?

I use a 35mm F2 AIS on a Nikon F3 and just love it. It focuses down to 8" / 10" and is wonderful for wide street work as well.

Picture taken with 35mm F2 (in the pouring rain)

MPTakingCover.jpg


On my FM2n I use a 28mm F2.8 AIS and that too is a lovely lens.

I had the 28mm before the 35mm and out of the two my preference is for the 35mm F2 (the 28mm F2.8 is not long for this world)

Al
 
Last edited:
I have several Nikkor lens (LTM, S & F mounts) so here it goes plain & simple my humble opinion;
Basic kit
35/1.4 AI-s (Mister E work speaks by itself, Fabulous!)
50/1:1.2 Ai
105/1.8 AI-s

small kit - 45/2.8 P or the E Series 50/1.8 (metal ring)
 
As long as we are jumping off the 35mm BANDWAGON why not the 28mm f/2? I haven't used them all but this is my favorite lens for corner to corner sharpness and NO FLARE!
28mmf/2




I agree with the above post about the 35 AFD, here's one with the 35mm AFD that I thought was pretty sharp:
 
Last edited:
35/2 AIS definitely. Built like a beast, vignettes beautifully, plenty sharp wide open, focuses incredibly close with CRC to boot.
Was on my D700 90% of the time and sadly was also on it when it was stolen this summer. As soon as the D800 comes out I'm buying that lens right away.
Only problem is I got mine a couple of years back on eBay for $80, perfect condition with a really nice metal Nikon lens hood. For some reason now you'll find yourself paying twice that for one in this condition.

I was tempted first time around by the 1.4 AIS but all the shots with it on flickr I found had really messy bokeh.

Some of the last few shots I made with it before it was swiped.

5009273833_92f9b5111c_b.jpg


5030166361_97409b312c_b.jpg


5047421765_9fe1c6a83a_b.jpg


5039085702_a206b34617_b.jpg


And you can see some more here.

I'm intrigued by a lens that I use wide open and have been thinking about the nikon 50mm f1.2.
Any users or opinions?
I have one. If you're good at manual focusing then it is a really great lens. Problem with me is as I was so inconsistent with focusing it just ended up annoying me.
I have some photos with it here.
 
Thank you all for posting sample shots. That helps a lot, at least, it helps sort out the alleged "imperfections" of these lenses. I am starting to hear my own voice saying "Don't believe anything you read on the internet."

I like the 35/1.4 shots, and the 32/2 AIS looks really nice, as does the AFD 35/2. All nice stuff.
 
The best is 35 2.0 and 2.8 manual focus AiS Nikkors.

They have the same color as 105 2.5 and other AiS lenses, mulit coated and work on digital pro cameras if you get there. Mine are used on F2 to D3. No complaints.

The best 28 is the AiS that focuses to .2 meters. Others are inferior.
 
I think that the consensus long ago formed around the 35 1,4, as being not just faster but BETTER than its slower sisters.

That seems to go against all I have read on the 35/1.4 Nikkor but for sure it will give you what an f2 lens can't and that is f1.4.

Bob
 
The Nikkor 35/1.4 incorporated a floating element from the beginning, as did the Nikkor 28/2 and Nikkor 24/2.8. Close-in, that should give an advantage. All are 9 element designs, and originally had the "Nikkor-N" designation. I have the 28/2, and is is very good wide-open and close-up. On the Olympus EP2, it is much sharper wide-open than the Konica 28/1.8 UC Hexanon. The latter lens typically sells for much more than the Nikkor.
 
I have the 35mm f2 AF-D, and it is my go-to lens on an APS sensor dslr, becoming a 50mm equivalent that focuses down to 1:4. It's contrast is high - great for colour, and although a little softer in the corners at f2 & f2.8, it is insanely sharp by f4 and always sharp in the centre.

Given the less than stellar corner sharpness at f2 & f2.8 on a crop sensor dslr, I imagine the corner sharpness may be unacceptable on a full frame 35mm/ digital camera. Also, the lens may render a little too contrastily for you, if shooting b&w, not that I shot a lot of black and white with this lens - just going by its contrast level for colour.

I believe the rendition of the 35mm f1.4 is supposed to be very nice, with beautiful bokeh, but I never shot with it myself.

EDIT: I have never found the bokeh on the 35mm f2 AF-D overly impressive. It never bothered me, but your mileage may vary.
 
Last edited:
Damien

I have not had too much to complain about the 35/2 AFD on my D700 as far as corner sharpness or lack of it. Of course I don't deliberately look for it but then it has not been so obvious as to annoy me into noticing. At wider aperatures, f2/2.8, it may not matter too much close up and personal if you are trying to isolate a certain feature.

Bob
 
Damien

I have not had too much to complain about the 35/2 AFD on my D700 as far as corner sharpness or lack of it. Of course I don't deliberately look for it but then it has not been so obvious as to annoy me into noticing. At wider aperatures, f2/2.8, it may not matter too much close up and personal if you are trying to isolate a certain feature.

Bob

Good to know, Bob. Clinical corner sharpness, or lack of, would not overly bother me for what I shoot, but thought it worth mentioning. Loved this lens on my APS-sensor dslrs when I shot digital, and this lens and the 50mm f1.4 AF-D spent most of the time mounted
 
Testing the 35/1.4 AIS on my D700 (FX format) really surprised me in that resolution tests were fairly consistent stop for stop from f/1.4 through f/5.6 at 100%. The only difference other than comatic flare wide open was increased DOF and contrast. Both center and edge sharpness at f/1.4 was very close to that at f/5.6. My 35-70/2.8 AFD did about as well at respective apertures and focal length. Testing on my F100 with fine grain film naturally revealed higher resolution at f/2.8 to f/5.6.
 
Back
Top Bottom