Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G Lens (Page 3): I concur, I also have both of these lenses and think the sigma is just as sharp!

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

MtnMan wrote:

It is wonderfully sharp.

But it does not have VR. My Sigma 17-50 f2.8 is nearly as sharp and fast, has excellent VR (OS in Sigmaspeak), and much more versatile. But it is also much heavier and more expensive. It put the 35 out of business for me. PM if you'd like to buy my 35.

I concur, I also have both of these lenses and think the sigma is just as sharp!

MichaelL

I used to have one, really only used it a couple of times. Other lenses owned - specifically 18-34 mm Nikon lens and a 24 - 120 lens - were more versatile and fit my photography. But it was a good little lens. I think I got like $110 selling it.

Bird Dawg Loc: Georgia

Great lens. You will enjoy it.

photonutt1970

I have the very lens you speak of and love it no complaints to report as of now

Jim Bob

nimbushopper wrote:

I concur, I also have both of these lenses and think the sigma is just as sharp!

Agreed. But there is a considerable price differential.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Here is an interesting review of the Nikon 35mm lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35mm-f18.htm

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Here is an interesting review of the Nikon 35mm lens:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35mm-f18.htm

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

IMHO, this lens is worth twice what it costs. I use mine all the time and no longer miss the 50mm f/1.2 I used to use on my F4s. I'll also add that for me, the real world difference between f/1.8 and f/1.2 doesn't come close to justifying the enormous price difference.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I have it for my D7000 and got it for the same reasons. I'm happy with it. I'm not a lens perfectionist as are some. I'll leave that to those who need to sell their work to make a living and other perfectionists.

Jim Bob

Rab-Eye wrote:

IMHO, this lens is worth twice what it costs. I use mine all the time and no longer miss the 50mm f/1.2 I used to use on my F4s. I'll also add that for me, the real world difference between f/1.8 and f/1.2 doesn't come close to justifying the enormous price difference.

Hey, are you attempting to get Nikon to raise the price?

Voyager1 Loc: Fort Myers, FL

Thanks to all of you again. I got the same result here as in the reviews on the B&H and Nikon web sites; lots of positive opinions. The photos in the Ken Rockwell review were impressive. Thanks for the link, jc.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I acquired a D500 around Thanksgiving and bought this lens for use shooting basketball as it would act as a 50. The combination of the two make a wonderful rig for that purpose. From what I can tell, the lens mount is metal, but perhaps they fooled my old eyes. I have no intention of scratching it to find out. I consider this a solid lens and a great performer. You will not be unhappy if you purchase one. I don't own the Sigma 35 ART but I do own the 50 version. Fantastic lens, as I expect the 35 would be, but way to heavy for my intended purpose. Best of luck.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I acquired a D500 around Thanksgiving and bought this lens for use shooting basketball as it would act as a 50. The combination of the two make a wonderful rig for that purpose. From what I can tell, the lens mount is metal, but perhaps they fooled my old eyes. I have no intention of scratching it to find out. I consider this a solid lens and a great performer. You will not be unhappy if you purchase one. I don't own the Sigma 35 ART but I do own the 50 version. Fantastic lens, as I expect the 35 would be, but way to heavy for my intended purpose. Best of luck.

linelink

I own a D5500 and I own a 35mm 1.8. A great lens at a great price. Better hurry before they jack up the price.

ecurb1105

A great little lens, I shoot it on my D90 as a normal and on my D600 in FX mode. I do not mind the corner fall off, its what I grew up with in the film age. Get the lens and go shooting.