< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX – now 100% sure

Yes, it will be DX and we may see it... on Monday, February 9th (I am not 100% about the date - either Feb 9th or Feb 16th). Price: EUR 250. One aspherical element. Yehaaaa!

I put the final nail on this rumor myself  - found it on a web site that I will not disclose (not dpreview). You got to trust me on this one folks. I will monitor this site to see if something else will leak.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Char

    Why DX? I don’t get it. Two years ago, this lens would have made a lot of people very happy. Today, I am not too sure about that. I would not buy it – simply because I know that I will one day have an FX body. Well, maybe a 35/1.4 FX will appear some time later…

    However, this is a clear statment from Nikon that they will continue to produce DX bodies (which I am sure they will even without this lens, but there have been people telling that in three years everything will be FX). And I will not believe it until I see it on the official Nikon website.

    • Bret

      I totally agree with you. Why make it DX? I mean, realistically, is size that big of concern on a 35mm prime lens anyway? How much smaller could it possible be by going DX instead of FX? And if size isn’t the reason, what is the reason?
      I’m a DX shooter and probably will be for at least 4-5 more years, but I’d rather have a sharp FX prime than a sharp DX prime… I’ll probably go for the 50mm f/1.4 hopefully around summer (I couldn’t get one before the price bump so might as well wait), but if that was a DX lens I wouldn’t buy it for sure.
      And yeah, a 35mm f/1.4 would be cool, but only if it was FX.

      • Bret

        then again, if it really is underneath $150 USD, and its sharp, I’d definitely still consider it for indoor type stuff, where I usually add ~2EV of vignetting later anyway… mostly out of habit now but I like the way it looks.

  • http://stylusecho.googlepages.com Stylus

    What the heck are Nikon thinking… they have too many DX lenses now.

    Double the amount of Canon’s EF-S lenses.

    • Roger Moore

      And how has that been working out for Canon? Nikon’s decision to put out a bunch of DX lenses happens to have coincided with the period when Nikon won back leadership in the DSLR market. It seems to me that “Canon didn’t do it that way” isn’t a very strong argument against Nikon’s decisions.

    • Dan

      Why DX ? Because DX is about 30x more popular than FX. Right now FX is IMHO an overpriced format (though the price should begin to drop in the next 2-3 years) and though there are some gains to the FX format over DX, the price to performance ratio isn’t reflected unless you shoot above ISO 800 all the time.

  • CatSplat

    Gah, DX? When they’re still missing a fast FX 35mm or 28mm? I’d say pretty much anyone who needs a ~35mm f/1.4 on DX already owns the Sigma 30/1.4. This lens seems targeted at a very small market.

    • ChrisL

      IIdeed, they probably owned 3 or 4 of the Sigma 30s to get one that wasn’t soft n one side, didn’t front focus, and so forth.

      Or they could get a Nikkor :)

      Looking forward to photozone.de getting its hands on this one.

    • Lars

      Actually no, it targets a huge market. Consider what a best-seller the 50/1.8 has been, in all its iterations. A 35/1.8 normal lens priced sub-$150 will fly off the shelves. Sigma’s 1.4 offering is in an entirely different price bracket. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

  • Mike

    I used to have the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Loved it, but started realigning my lenses to go FX. Nikon will get a lot of kudos for bringing out their first DX prime lens, but I predict they will get alot more flack that they chose to release this in 2009. I.e. After the launch of 3 FX bodies. Other than price and size, why DX? An FX 35 1.8 AFS wouldn’t be that much more weight wise, and now Nikon has potentially shot themselves in the foot by limiting what customers would want this lens, it being DX. I’m scratching my head on this one.

  • Janda

    I’ll buy it, if the size, performance and prize are right. I don’t see that as a hobby photographer I would need a FX body, so I’m dreaming of Nikon delivering decently performin, cheapish and pancakish prime.

    Sigma 30mm f1.4 is huge and suffers from sample variation. Nikkor 35mm f2 is slow to focus.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      “Sigma 30mm f1.4 is huge”

      Have you ever seen one or used one? If you’re comparing it to a pancake lens, then yes, it’s huge. Otherwise, I’d have to disagree. It’s not that big at all.

      I just compared it side-by-side w/ the 50mm f1.4G and it’s *barely* wider. It is a bit heavier, but heavier does not equal, “huge.”

      *scratches head*
      From people saying that the D300’s been out for almost 2 years to someone thinking the Sig 30’s “huge.” Is this “Nikon Rumors For Everything Under the Sun?” LOL. If anyone tried to take what passes for fact on this site seriously, they’d be in for a serious headache :D

      • Janda

        Yes I have owned Sigma 30mm, and two Nikkor 35mm’s. Comparing the two I would say Sigma is huge. Yes it’s f1.4 vs. f2, but then it’s DX vs. FX lens too.

      • rjm

        The Sigma 30mm is enormous, face it. On a D40 it looks completely silly.

        I’m all for dropping 0.5 – 1.0 F stop if it means a more compact lens, ditto going from FX to DX. Scaling back the max aperture also means a simpler, cheaper lens, and often one that performs better in absolute terms.

        That’s where I think Sigma goofed. the 30mm was timed just perfectly, but many people such as myself gave it a pass when they a) read the reviews b) saw the price tag and c) realized how big it was.

  • Anonymous

    I would be disappointed if this rumor was true. However, I guess it makes some sense that fixed primes remain AF-only for the time being, since every full frame body has a built-in screwdriver motor.

    Still, not cool :(

    Anyway, I hope more lenses will be revealed!

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Remember there was a rumor a while ago that Nikon will take away the build in body motor from all DX cameras? Maybe they are setting the stage for that. I will try to find the link.

      • Anonymous

        That’s nothing short of scary!

      • http://www.eisner.id.au Joel

        wow, so either I buy FX or I don’t upgrade my D90 ever (as I have plenty of non motor lenses)..

        I really can’t see them doing this especially on D300 level, D90 level maybe but still a bad move…

  • niomo

    250€?! I hope it. for DX?! i I hope not

  • Pablov

    D400 is coming….

  • Sally

    I would pay US$200. If the price is more than US$300, then why won’t customers buy a f/1.4 lens that costs only slightly more?

    • cv

      What’s your definition of “only slightly more”?

  • DONGIORGIO

    A WASTE OF TIME IF ITS CORRECT, NIKON WAKE UP YOU HAVE 3 TOP BODIES NOW D700,D3 AND D3X STAY WITH FX DEVELOPMENT YOU CAN ALWAYS USE IT ON A DX BODY.

  • DONGIORGIO

    YOU NEED A 35MM 1.4 LIKE CANON

  • Andrew

    this is so dumb, nikon is retarded they dont give a shit about pro’s anymore. They only care about making lenses for the D40’s look at all the variable aperture lenses in the past year and a half. Its dumb they need to make some fast primes for 35mm sensors. add AFS if you wish but i really dont care as long as it the best glass they can put in it and its fast. like im considering Canon because their prime selection blows Nikons away. Ive been extremely disappointed with everything nikon has done short of the D700 and D3/D3X in the past year or so.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      This could be based on the economic situation – I think Nikon doesn’t just plan lenses in advance – at any point of time they have a bunch of lenses close to being ready and they decide what to release based on economic/marketing/competition and other factors. I could be wrong.

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

        I just love the new threaded comments, don’t you? Now it’s a pleasure to post here :)

        • Maxime

          I agree! Good job :D

          • Pablov

            yeah !! it keeps our avatar (……testing…….1…2…3…)

            BTW, thanks for the link you sent me :)

          • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

            Thanks!

    • Char

      Yeah, exactly. Within the last one-and-a-half years, there was:

      Nikon D3
      Nikon D700
      Nikon D3x
      AF-S Micro Nikkor 60/2.8
      AF-S Nikkor 14-24/2.8
      AF-S Nikkor 24-70/2.8
      AF-S Nikkor 50/1.4
      AF-S Nikkor 300/2.8 VR
      AF-S Nikkor 400/2.8 VR
      AF-S Nikkor 500/4 VR
      AF-S Nikkor 600/4 VR
      PC-E Micro Nikkor 85/2.8
      PC-E Micro Nikkor 45/2.8
      PC-E Nikkor 24/3.5

      But yes, Nikon obviously gives a shit about pros.

      • mildred

        My words exactly! (Y)

    • Mike

      I agree regarding the variable aperture lenses, but in the last 2 years Nikon has come out with
      14-24 2.8
      24-70 2.8
      400 2.8 VR
      500 4 VR
      600 4 VR
      D3, D700, D3x

      I hardly think Nikon has forgotten about pros. In my opinion they have forgotten about the “enough disposable income to bypass variable aperture products, but not enough disposable income to buy their high end constant 2.8 stuff”. Some constant f4 a would be nice. 100-300 f/4 VR! TC compatible. I’d be on the wait list for that

  • yuck!

    while the idea of a DX prime makes me yawn, at least I’ll have a gift for my brother’s D40 this christmas.!

    This is one lens I’ll never add to my bag. But at least this leaves open the possibility of a 1.4 FX version…damn nikon. They make crazy crap like PC lenses and they can’t even update their prime line up.!

  • rthomas

    I hope this is FX … otherwise my next lens purchase will be the old 35mm f/2.0.

  • Emil

    Actually it makes a lot of sense. It’s a 50mm equivalent on DX. A 50/1.8 is mostly of interest to the amateur segment, and they use DX. I think it’s a great idea. I’ll buy one. Still, I definitely long for new Nikon FX primes as well, and especially at the wide end. I’d pay anything for an AF-S 24/1.4.

    • Anonymous

      well thought!

  • Zabbu

    I’m pretty sure they’ve got something up their sleeves this March at PMA.

  • Phil

    While yes it would be nice if Nikon came out with an FX prime that all Nikon bodies could use, at the same time think about how many DX cameras there are vs. FX. D40/D60, D80, D90, D200, and D300 are ALL DX cameras, while the only FX cameras are the D700 and D3/D3x (and I wonder how many D3Xs nikon has sold??). Who knows, maybe Nikon wanted to hit a certain price point and therefore had to make a DX lens. But to say that there is no market for a DX prime is just flat out silly.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      “But to say that there is no market for a DX prime is just flat out silly.”

      Not to mention everyone that’s slobbering over a possible upcoming D400. Those ppl would be looking at something like this, I’d imagine.

  • Bart W.

    Why would this be a retarded idea? Many Nikon shooters use the D40 as a lightweight “always with you” kind of camera. The *ONLY* thing that doesn’t make that package perfect is that there is no small, light AF lens to complement it. You’re pretty much stuck with the slow 18-55mm kit lens or something similar – or an AF lens that you’ll have to focus manually if you want at least metering.

    Of course you can now put a 50/1.4AF-S on that camera but the focal length for a DX camera is wrong, and it’s a fairly expensive lens.

    I think the idea is brilliant: a normal lens, DX allows it to be fairly light and cheap at a 1.8 speed, so you don’t end up with a “what’s the point” kind of contraption on your small and light D40 that you get when the Sigma 30/1.4 is used.

    Nikon “ignoring the pro shooters”? Here we go again, it’s the summer of 2007 all over. Why don’t you sell your gear and get Canon instead? Just don’t take them out in bad weather, ok? I think that with the current economic crisis, Nikon’s priority will be to push out products that make money. A DX lens that will likely sell in the range of 10,000s will probably make more money than a lens that is only interesting for users of a camera that sold in 1% or less than the amounts of the D40 and D60. I think that Nikon has done more than enough to make pro shooters happy – D3, D700, 24-70, SB-900, to name a few items. I can’t blame them for putting some money makers on the market.

    I also wouldn’t be surprised if a D60 succesor (I suspect the D40 is going to stay as the *really* low cost DSLR) is going to be announced at the PMA – the timing of announcing this lens does not seem so random after all…

    • Lars

      Yep.

    • Char

      Actually, all you say ist true, but has one flaw: The price point that is reported. 250 EUR is just a little much if you want to construct a small, lightweight lens. If it was like 150 EUR (in the range of the old 50/1.8), I would totally agree. But if they wanted to construct a small, simple, leightweight, DX-only lens, why wouldn’t they be able to sell it for less than 250 EUR?

      • Tom

        AF-S, eco-glass, a high yen are some reasons but the main one is simply that it’s priced at what they think they can get for it. The only alternative for D40/60 users is the dirty thirty which is currently priced 30% higher.

  • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

    as someone that sells these things I will say this is brilliant and something that I’ve asked the Nikon reps about for the past year. The d40/x/60 (plus whatever replaces it sooner than later) all NEED a fast lens for the parents that want good shots of babies and in low light at the museum/zoo etc that they all go to.
    This had been just one of the reasons I would generally steer someone toward a xs recently – the canon 50 1.8 for 85 bucks was a no brainer for someone that wanted nice “portrait style” shots of the babies that NEVER stop moving…
    This will make it that much easier to sell the little nikons and take away one of the primary advantages that canon has had for the past two years.
    Good move (though I do say it would have been better just to make a cheap 35 1.8 that was built normal so that anyone could use it…)for nikon

  • Sevikyrk

    I’m going to bug my Nikon rep about this. I would kill for a good Nikon 35/1.4 FX (or a 24/1.4 would be even better).

  • zet

    Joke? I hope…
    DX not sounds good.
    Why not FF?

  • B3

    Okay, sure, maybe it’s a good move for financial reasons, but i would kill for that lens if it was FX. I mean kill! There better be something coming for us full framers at PMA, or I’m just going to post another complaint on another blog – cuz that’s really all I can do and I’m not switching from Nikon. But man it makes me angry seeing so many DX lenses come out when Nikon needs to update fast wide primes, especially when they could have made it FX. Oh well.

  • Chad

    Nikon is trying to convince us that DX isn’t dead. Let’s face it, FX is out of reach of 98% of camera buyers… they have to continue to support it and make products people want to buy and CAN afford.

    Plus.. they have to realize Sigma’s 30mm is taking some of their business in the fast-prime, sub-50mm market.

    • http://nikonkrab.multiply.com/ HDZ

      Hey!!! How to have my own avatar???

      I need that more than 35 f/1.8G DX!!! ;)

  • Woofie

    30/1.8 DX is good for DX camera owners to do portraits… maybe after this, they will announce a 30/1.2 FX!!! :P

    • Woofie

      oops.. I meant 35 for both :P

  • pretty boi

    Why not FF? AF 35/2D is small enough…if it’s DX FF users wont be able to use it (well of course they could but with heavy vignette)
    But let’s wait and see….I really hope it’s FF

    • bigmouth

      For some reason I think if I own a D700 or higher FF camera, I will only consider 50mm F1.4 AF-S, F1.8 is armature aperture and not fast enough.

      • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

        so what you are saying is that with the exception of the the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 nikon ONLY makes amateur primes since the rest are 1.8 or slower…?
        that is silly…
        IF this lens had been built AFS and FX you would have seen it on plenty of D700’s replacing the old 35/2 but like i said earlier it makes sense to Nikon financially if not from a pro/advanced publicity standpoint

  • anonymous

    very good.., this 35 f1.8 AFS DX lens will do nicely for us who needs a 50mm equiv. lens on DX dslrs. it’s 52.5mm to be exact but that’s close to 50mm. and it’s a nikkor lens. price isn’t too expensive either. so it’s all good! bring it out Nikon!!

  • Greg Tommers

    Wow, looks like NR Admin discovered something on the official Nikon Europe site! That’s the only possible explanation for not posting the link (ie. he wants to get more info from it, and not have it just be exposed and subsequently taken down).

    I looked at the Nikon Europe side and they have a very rudimentary system for categorizing their pages. It’s quite possible one could discover pages that have been published but not linked to by just systematically guessing different integers.

    For example, all their press releases take this form:

    http://www.europe-nikon.com/press_room/news.html?locale=en_GB&bandwidth=broad&id=1919&type_index=2

    Try plugging in different numbers for the “id” and maybe you’ll find something that isn’t intended to be seen yet. hehe.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      ;)

      • Tom

        I tried 1909 to 1928 and nothing….except the existing news.

        Anyway, it’ll be weeks before I can actually buy one, but I’m definitely gonna get one. I’m sooooo plsd I already sold the Sigma; they sure to drop in value now.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/nieblung Brian

    As some others have stated, this lens is meant to be a fast prime for the D40/x & 60 users and to compete with the Sigma 1.4. I honestly think this is a smart move by Nikon.

    A lot of AF 50mm f/1.8D lenses for $110 have been sold to Nikon DX users over the last few years. I can’t tell you how many posts are on the Flickr forums of people asking if they should buy the AF 50mm f/1.8D. I can’t see a f/1.2 DX lens, but a f/1.8…sure. Cheap to produce, made of plastic, and the D40/x/60 crowd won’t be faced with a lens purchase that costs as much as their camera bodies.

  • ken rocky

    Yay this keeps D40 valueable still.

    This lens might be to complement D40/D60/D400 future releases which are DX.

    Makes FX cameras targeted mostly for pro not for everyone to keep the FX prices stay higher.

  • Geoff

    If it comes to pass. This would show the World that DX is here for the long term. I will probably upgrade to a D400 once it comes out and the new lens would really complement it.

  • 35 dx

    Still, what’s the point of the dx on a mid range prime? Why not just make if an fx lens that works on the d40/d60? These mid range primes are small and light anyway, so I see no point unless they’re going to release a 35 f1.4 for fx in addition

  • http://www.echenique.com Carlos Echenique

    I see a lot of questions vis a vis “Why a DX prime?”. OK in the DX format a 35mm lens equates to a 52.5mm lens in FX. 50mm is the accepted “normal” lens in film and FX cameras the bast approximates the human field of vision. Nikon recently released a 50mm f/1.4 AF-S G lens in FX and with this 35mm adds a similar “normal” lens for the DX format.

    • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

      I think most people get that at this point but the real question is why the big 2 (Canon and Nikon) continue down this path of DX/EFS rather than just designing FF lenses where the “sweetspot” hits the dx sensor but the lens is still useful for FF shooters…
      example – the 17-35 and 17-55 2.8s are fx and dx but about the exact same size – I think the difference in the 55 is one more element – that lens could easily have been designed for ff – but targeted toward dx shooters but still allowing the fx people an amazing range on a wide angle walk around lens…
      Canon has done the same nonsense – if you look at the rear of many of the efs lenses that are not “kit” the glass is almost the same size as the normal Canon mount – just the depth is different…(which nikon doesn’t do so it’s even more moot for them)
      The whole thing is silly to force you into buying multiple lenses….
      While I TOTALLY understand why a cheaply built (i’m guessing similar to the 50 1.8) 35 makes TONS of sense – the fact that it is dx only is a STUPID decision that will haunt them as the d200/300 buyers that are thinking of upgrading to fx will never buy it….it is marketed solely at the d40/60 and d80/90 class people which is a BIG market but a market that will be annoyed that they can NOT use this if they ever move to FF

  • Pablov

    Someone explain me, why so many people mention the D40 ??
    I really think Nikon will announce a D400 at PMA, so this lens will go for it
    Even though you can use this lens on D40, I ‘m sure Nikon wasn’t thinkin on the D40 when making this lens… (sorry Ken if I dissapoint you :P )

    • Jon Paul

      I think they’re referring to the D40/D40x/D60 line, which has no autofocus screw. This makes any non-AF-S lens a manual focus lens on those cameras. So far, the only prime option with autofocus for owners of these cameras is the new (expensive) 50mm AF-S.
      I’m not in that category, but I’m interested to see how this lens performs, because this is the ideal length for some large family group shots, and currently I use the 35mm setting of a tamron 17-50 2.8, but there is still some distortion with it.

      • Jon Paul

        To clarify–I meant the only prime option at short focal length. And I guess the 60mm macro is there, too.

  • Weston

    so that’s about 319 US dollars. totally realistic, I would pre order this as soon as i Could for weddings, it’d be perfect on my D90

    • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

      it will be cheaper than that – the euro price never translates directly. That is why you have so many europeans buying their nikon and canon gear in the US

  • http://godproposes.blogspot.com Rakesh

    I don’t see what’s wrong with Nikon releasing a DX prime lens. Ok the argument of the FX lens can be used on a DX body does go against a DX prime lens. But I don’t think it will be a failure. Since the number of DX cameras out there is higher than the FX. The pro shooters may cry foul at Nikon’s decision but then this really is a great move. Will look forward for this lens. :)

    Cheers Nikon.

  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    I really hope this lens is not a bad joke on a massive scale, but I am staying firm behind this rumor for now.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      ” really hope this lens is not a bad joke on a massive scale”

      What happened to your 100% sure line? (as in, the title)
      100% tells me that you found concrete sources. Are you saying that those sources aren’t so reliable after all?

      • Tom

        Massive meaning even Nikon Europe getting it wrong ?

        2 things I’d like to know – min focusing distance and weight.

        Anybody know ?

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

          ok Tom, I will post some more info briefly especially for you.

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

        No, I said that I am staying firm behind this rumor – I just had a thought and I shared it. Till now I have been reporting rumors with 95%, 99% certainty – this is the first time I am saying 100% and I am just a little bit nervous, that’s all – it a human nature. 100%

  • DNHJR

    I still can’t beleave this is a DX lens. I’ll beleave it when I see it on the Nikon website.

  • http://wijnands.blogspot.com Jeroenw

    Write DX and all the so called pro’s are crying in their coffee. I think an affordable dx could be a very interesting experiment. See what it does. Oh, and contrary to popular opinion, not everyone owns a D700 or better and not everyone gets all starry eyed with full frame. Even pros tend to use DX format cameras as backup.

    On the positive side, if this is released it will give all the FX fanboys, self proclaimed pros and ALL CAPS WRITERS something to bash. Should keep them happy for a few weeks

  • dino

    Kudos to who leaked it last July… DX in the end is “just” a feature, but a 35 F/1.8 was known already 7 months ago…

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      “was known already 7 months ago”? Did I missed it?

  • Crabby

    You *do* know that Nikon already made a 35mm f/1.8 lens, don’t you?

    • anonymous

      Well yeah, about a 100 years ago for their rangefinder cameras….

  • GingerJimmy

    it’s not happening on Monday
    a Polish photo gear testing/news site optyczne.pl collects all the rumours from the week and puts them into one post like this http://www.optyczne.pl/1558-owo%C5%9B%C4%87-O_tym_si%C4%99_m%C3%B3wi__czyli_plotki_i_ploteczki_z_ostatniego_tygodnia.html
    this one was posted yesterday, but they didn’t have the news of the 35 1.8 dx.
    when I asked him why, he said he wrote the post the day prior.
    I quoted the news about the lens coming on the 9th, and he said it wouldn’t happen because they would have had the official news already.
    (they did get pre-production models of cameras before the official release)

    I still hope it’s not DX :(

    • GingerJimmy

      ”him” referring to the site admin

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      Trust me it will happened – who would you trust NR or this polish site for Nikon rumors :)
      joking…. just wait few more hours

  • http://www.xanga.com/cameratalk Camera Talk Blog

    The debate should not be whether or not this is a GOOD choice on Nikon’s part. The debate should be whether or not Nikon is planning on making MORE PRIMES to compliment this DX prime.

    Personally, I can see how a DX equivalent to the standard 50mm might “work” for Nikon- They price it under $150, make it average construction and sharpness grade, and boom it is in a league of it’s own in comparison to the likes of the Sigma 30mm 1.4… (I would rather have the Sigma, but that’s a VERY different discussion…)

    Then, like I said, the debate should be whether Nikon will ALSO be making a 35 AFS 1.4 G ED etc. for FX, a pro-grade lens. Or a 28 1.4, or a 24 1.4, …you get the picture.

    One thing is quite clear: advanced users are crying out for high-grade FX primes FAR MORE than the amateurs are interested in a normal lens for their D40. In fact most of the people I know who are into photography enough to even consider a prime, well they upgraded to the D80 / D90, and are already happy with the 35 f/2 FX…

    So I’m not saying that the market isn’t out there, I’m just saying it’s going to be a REALLY tough sell to make an AFS DX lens like that if it costs any more than $150 or so. (Which it almost has to, considering the recent Yen > USD fiasco…)

    Nikon has a head of steam going for them in the FX department. The bodies have been nothing short of award-winning, and the new 14-24 & 24-70 are simply putting their competition to shame. Nikon will be unwise to slip up and not ALSO offer more FX primes at PMA…

    I have my hopes, of course. We’ll get something FX that is 35mm or wider, and f/1.8 or wider… That’s my wager.

    =Matt=

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      I think everyone crying over milk that hasn’t been spilt yet is ridiculous. So what if it’s DX-only? Don’t buy it!

      I’m with you- I think there will be FX-oriented lenses coming out of the pipeline soon enough. Patience will see us through, I’m sure. No sense in getting our panties in a bunch just because Nikon decided to use a DX prime as a smokescreen before PMA ;)

  • http://dadabase.de Johannes

    BTW: I just found this Tokina AF 35mm/2.8 Objektiv DX on Amazon. Nikon is not alone with this lens!

    http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B0016QDHCK?ie=UTF8&tag=nikorumo-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1638&creative=19454&creativeASIN=B0016QDHCK

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      I could not even find this lens on Amazon US – I guess it was not a good seller.

  • Ricardson

    I’m DX shooter.. and its great have 35mm DX!! Why people thinks DX will die? I have 17-55DX and love this lens…. also 10.5 fisheye…
    I think the amauter/hobbist buy more than professionals.. that why more DX lens…. If I move to FX I have to spend more and more money….

  • Tim Catchall

    Shame on Nikon if this is DX. 4 years ago they needed DX primes. Today, no. I have just bought a D700 and was fully expecting them to update a couple of the old AF-D primes this year. If they replace them with lenses that I can’t use on my new and expensive camera I will not be happy. And there will many more likely, not least those who have just dropped $8000 on a D3X, only to see Nikon release new lenses which won’t even work on it. If it is DX, Nikon can expect a lot of protest.

  • http://web-fotografen.dk Web-fotografen.dk

    I still use a DX camera (D300) + 17-55 + 80-200 AF-s, at weddings ect.
    So for me the 35 1,8 sounds great! i will use it for indoor/lowlight portraits :O)

    When the D400 arrives i will bye it, and still enjoy using my DX lenses, at work and in private use :O)

    Carsten Nielsen
    Denmark

  • jovan

    I disagree with the moaning over making this lens DX. First, a 1.8 is not really a pro lens and so has no business being FX. Secondly, ‘one day’ we may all be back to FX, but who know when ‘one day’ will come.

    Given the quality of today’s DX sensors and those likely to come — it does not seem necessary for us to go back to the FX format. The sensors are far more limited by lenses than vice versa. FX may be ‘relegated’ to the equivalent of medium format, exclusive to pros and those with a huge set of legacy lenses. The consumer and prosumer (consumers with too much money) will be happy to have DX with a full line-up of lenses.

    That said, after recently putting a 50mm in front of my DX format Nikon, I’m not as interested in a 35mm as I was 6mts ago. The 50mm on a DX body is phenomenal for portraits or small group shots. When consumers begin to figure out that $100 prime beats the pants off a $600 zoom, these DX lenses will fly off the shelf. If Nikon is really smart, they’ll make it an economy kit to get people interested. That way, the practically guarantee future sales of other lenses.

  • http://www.pbase.com/jameslclarke James Clarke

    Makes perfectly good sense to me… I use the 35f/2 on my D80 a lot and even more on my F80 (Film). However the it doesn’t autofocus on D40/D40x/D60 cameras, the point of these cameras are that they are small. If you update the 35f/2 FX to give it proper AF-S it’s going to make it bigger, you might as well make a 35f/1.4 FX, which would be too big for the D40/D40x/D60. So make a 35 f/1.8 DX with micro motor AF-S and it will be nice and small and fit nicely with D40/D40x/D60. If owned on of these camera I be putting my order in as soon as it’s released. Actually I might buy my wife a D40 with one. Just hope it has a metal mount.

  • Back to top