Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
Posts: 3,125
Threads: 34
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
21
The review, great. The lens, not exactly (but, of course, a 35mm lens is a more difficult case than a 50mm in the same quality range).
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
Well, yes, it is not the best of the f/1.8 primes. But also not the worst 
Editor
opticallimits.com
Posts: 621
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
10-28-2023, 09:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-28-2023, 09:41 PM by joachim.)
Don’t you think it’s a bit large? My old 35/2 Planar for Contax G (or a classic Summicron) are what I got socialised with.
No I never had a Summicron, but I still have the Planar.
enjoy
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
Well, everything seems large if you compare it to 35mm rangefinder lenses, doesn't it?
But yes, the Z f/1.8 primes are a bit on the large side. It feels like Nikon put higher priority on performance than portability for the f/1.8 primes, which is perfectly fine for me (I personally don't mind heavy equipment, actually prefer holding something solid).
I do hope, though, that some day they also offer a slower and more compact line of primes as an alternative, something in the range of f/2.5 or f/2.8. But at higher quality than those pancake-ish primes they already have, please
Editor
opticallimits.com
Posts: 2,724
Threads: 595
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
15
10-30-2023, 06:38 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-30-2023, 06:41 AM by toni-a.)
Nikon always looking to be in the middle and being a compromise, dunno if this strategy works.
Personally, when it comes to primes middle size like f2.0 mid-range primes don't make a lot of sense and Nikon went exactly this way, why would you get f2.0 prime when you already have f2.8 zoom? Modern zoom lenses have already very good mage quality making them a more convenient replacement for primes.
Usually in medium range when angle coverage is not an issue, you get a prime because it is small and lightweight then a pancake 35mmf2.8 makes more sense or because it is much faster, here also a 35mmf1.4 makes more sense.
I am gear hoarder... have 35mmf2.0 and 35mmf1.4 (plus zooms obviously) , ever since I got 35mmf1.4, its sister the 35mmf2.0 has never been in my camera bag despite being somehow smaller.
I used to think 35mmf1.4 was a boring useless lens with a focal in the middle of nowhere, till the day I bought one 
Posts: 3,125
Threads: 34
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
21
Right... There's just no point in comparing current lenses (except a small slice of those deliberately created to be super compact) to the old ones. Then was then and now is now...
And Toni, I thought I was the biggest hoarder here, with 8 EF mount lenses, 1 Z mount and 1 NX mount?
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 22
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
8
(10-30-2023, 07:56 AM)Rover Wrote: Right... There's just no point in comparing current lenses (except a small slice of those deliberately created to be super compact) to the old ones. Then was then and now is now...
And Toni, I thought I was the biggest hoarder here, with 8 EF mount lenses, 1 Z mount and 1 NX mount?
Biggest hoarder? Not by a long shot <ROFL>
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
Posts: 3,125
Threads: 34
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
21
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 22
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
8
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
|
