02-28-2012, 02:01 PM
[quote name='TheChris' timestamp='1330419032' post='16252']
Well, regarding the history of recent f/1.8 lenses Nikon released (35mm DX, 50mm FX) and their respective performance, I expected a pretty solid performer. But I was unsure in what ways and to what degree Nikon would limit the capabilities of the 85mm f/1.8 compared to the f/1.4 variant considering the huge difference in price. For instance, I expected them to over-correct the aberration and prioritize sharpness for the cost of having outlines in bokeh. The fact that it is so much nearer to the 85mm f/1.4 than to its predecessor in terms of image character is a surprise for me, and a very pleasant one for sure <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Christian
[/quote]
I am always curious about why Nikon produced a DX rather than a FX 35mm f1.8. If the 35mm f1.8 were a FX, the AF-S (35mm, 50mm, 85mm) f1.8 would form a perfect set.
Well, regarding the history of recent f/1.8 lenses Nikon released (35mm DX, 50mm FX) and their respective performance, I expected a pretty solid performer. But I was unsure in what ways and to what degree Nikon would limit the capabilities of the 85mm f/1.8 compared to the f/1.4 variant considering the huge difference in price. For instance, I expected them to over-correct the aberration and prioritize sharpness for the cost of having outlines in bokeh. The fact that it is so much nearer to the 85mm f/1.4 than to its predecessor in terms of image character is a surprise for me, and a very pleasant one for sure <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />Christian
[/quote]
I am always curious about why Nikon produced a DX rather than a FX 35mm f1.8. If the 35mm f1.8 were a FX, the AF-S (35mm, 50mm, 85mm) f1.8 would form a perfect set.