< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

New Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G FX lens to be announced in early January

Pin It

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f1.8G full frame lens
For the 2014 CES show Nikon will announce a new AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G full frame lens. I do not have an exact date, but CES starts on January 7th and most of the new product announcements are done in the first day. Nikon already has a 35mm f/1.4G FX lens ($1,619) and a 35mm f/1.8G DX lens ($196.95) - the new addition should provide a lightweight and cheaper alternative for full frame shooters.

There will be also another DX lens announcement during the CES show, but I am still trying to get the details - stay tuned.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://tech.t9i.in/ Tahir Hashmi

    Oh, let the other one be the 24mm f/2 DX, pretty please!

    • ausserirdischegesund

      Oh yes! We need a 24mm for DX. Single most needed DX lens. And please make it cheap&compact like the 35mm DX.

      • Deep_Lurker

        If I were to bet, I’d have to bet against a 24mm DX. Mostly because FX shooters also want a 24mm f/2, and Nikon is more likely to come out with that, saying “DX shooters can use it, too!”

        The DX lens that Nikon is most likely to come out with next (if not yet another consumer zoom…) is the long-awaited 16-85mm f/4.

        Not that Nikon coming out with a 24mm DX would be a bad thing.

        • ausserirdischesindgesund

          A 24mm f/2 might cost somewhere from $600 to $1000. Too much for DX users.

          A DX 24mm might cost maybe 300 or 400 bucks.

          • Deep_Lurker

            Not too much for the subset of DX shooters who would be interested in a 24mm prime in the first place. And a 24mm DX would cut against the mantra of “if you’re a serious photographer, you’ll want to buy FX glass. Even if your current camera has a mere DX sensor.”

            The only way I could see Nikon coming out with a 24mm DX lens is if it’s a low-hanging fruit for them, technologically speaking, or if they decide to do a “buy prime lenses!” marketing campaign aimed at the consumer-level DSLR market.

            • ausserirdischesindgesund

              Just look at the many many MicroFourThirds primes. MFT has got a 17/2.8, a 17/1.8, a 20/1.7,
              a 19/2.8 in that range.

              And there are probably 10 times as many Nikon DX cameras around as MFT.

            • Bret M

              And all of those lenses suck. I really wanted to add a micro 4/3 camera just as a fun pocket type thing to take to work or whatever with me, and while the bodies and sensors are nice all of those lenses have huge CA and distortion, and mediocre border sharpness. The only lens for m4/3 that’s pretty decent is the very expensive 25mm f/0.95… even the Nikon CX lenses beat those things.

        • Tony the TIger

          Why would FX users need a 24mm f/2? There is already a 28mm 1.8G with the naughty N on it. And can be found in the 500 usd on a good refurbished day.

          • Bret M

            Hey, people still pay $2000+ for the 28mm f/1.4D, it has lower performance than the newer 28mm 1.8G. Plus let’s face it, nobody needs the difference between 1.4 and 1.8, at least not in a wide angle. Personally I think buying the 24mm f/1.4G is a waste at the price it’s currently perched. People go crazy over a lens’ reputation rather than facts.

        • MB

          Now when everybody else is offering standard DX zoom at f/2.8 or even better at f/1.8 who really needs something as slow as f/4 on DX?

  • guymp

    A wish fulfilled! I’ve been longing for a modern replacement for the 35 f/2. I hope it’s as small and light.

    • Travis

      I love mine to death, it’s paired with my D600 as much as body caps of my other cameras!

      • guymp

        Absolutely. I have vacillated over the 34 f/1.4 (or Sigma) and bought neither because they are too bulky. Small, light and sharp. That’s what I’m after.

        • BLight

          if you dont need the AF, i’ve been getting excellent results with the CV 40mm f2 pancake lens. Really awesome performance in a super small package.

    • Marcel Speta

      i am using 35/2 for years. Its great lens, but was thinking to make an upgrade to Sigma 1.4 ART …. seems i will wait … hopefully the price will be set right

      • peterw

        Same here. Althought, I don’t really like the IQ of 35 F2 at F2. Which is my main reason to use it. http://500px.com/photo/46525574
        I had a special price in mind for the Sigma… but it was cancelled… Not sure if I am happy or unhappy about that now :)

      • peterw

        (Tried to link to a picture with 35 F2, shouldn’t have done that that as a guest it appears? )
        I love the 35F2 for its size and view, but IQ at F2 is not great. The Sigma 35 F1,4 beats it at F1,4 by a mile or so. But heavy, heavy. Lets see :)

        • Anónimo

          This lens was never meant to give it’s best wide open

    • Alistair Maitland

      As can be seen by the number of likes, we all agree with you! If it just follows the same build and performance of the other f1.8s we shouldn’t have a problem. Although, it needs to go to f2 to do this, I have no problem with that. The current f2 just doesn’t cut it wide open.

  • Padaung

    Great news! This will become a popular fixture on my camera. Fingers crossed the ‘price is right’.

    • silmasan

      My bet is on $500 without the “N” marking (just like the 85).

      • Dpablo unfiltered

        My bet is that it will be good enough that it will steal back the market from Sigma. Then they will have to make another f1.4 lens…

        • Global

          Me too. +1

        • silmasan

          That’d be awesome :)

          • shan

            I will replace sigma lens with it. Sigma 35mm is good but focusing problem still

      • bob2

        If the pricing for the 28mm f/1.8 is any guide, it’ll be around $699. No reason for Nikon to undersell itself.

        • David

          The 28 does have the nano coat and gold ring though so I think it eill come in under that.

      • Bret M

        I think that’s a reasonable guess. Probably be pretty close to the 50mm f/1.4G to give the street shooters a tough decision between the two… so that they end up with both haha. Sounds like a trap I’d fall into (Still kicking myself for not picking up the 50 on that Amazon deal for $350!).

    • mojo point

      yessss! i will come at 399

  • Jaz

    Awesome! I’ve just traded my 35mm f/1.8G DX lens sometime last month and was regretful about it. Soon I will have this FX version to add to my prime lens f/1.8G family! Hooray~

  • http://500px.com/yoan_mitov/ Yoan

    Let’s hope the other lens isn’t just another slow superzoom one… We want more primes!

  • nikomment

    Come on Nikon, why do you not listen?

    Wide, compact DX primes.

    • Spy Black

      I’d be surprised if Nikon ever makes another DX lens again. Seems like they’re moving back to FX and leaving DX behind.

      • stoooopid

        Yup. It seems like Nikon is shifting towards lower cost FX products, rather than more DX products. I think they are giving the aps-c market to mirrorless and will plant their flag squarely on the FX mountain. I suspect all Nikon bodies will be FX within 5 years (unless they still have the CX bodies around).

        • Spy Black

          I think Nikon’s DX sensors will move into a new line of mirrorless cameras, at least if they’re smart enough to try to start catching up to the rest of the industry.

          • stoooopid

            that would be interesting. But I hope they don’t just do a “me-too” type of mirrorless in the sony nex style. I hope they come up with something original. I don’t like the size/shape of the nex bodies. I think something more like a mini dslr shape would work for me. Or even a mini df type (maybe).

            • Spy Black

              Yeah, a Nikon SP clone would be awesome.

        • Ken Elliott

          I suspect they find that the typical DX user doesn’t buy many lenses – perhaps 1 or two zooms. The FX shooter is far more serious and more likely to buy primes. That means the serious DX user is a small enough market that it would be hard to justify a DX-only prime. The CX user (Nikon V1, etc.) has 3 primes, and the DX user has 3 primes. The FX shooter has 43 primes. There’s a pattern here.

      • Mike

        Nikon has indeed left DX behind. Forget about seeing anything other than 18-xxx lenses for this system.

        However, I’m quite sure Nikon is pushing the last FX lenses as well. I’m expecting a full frame mirrorless system from Nikon in the next 3-4 years.

        • Spy Black

          Three to four years? They’ll be history if they wait that long. They need to come out with something TRULY competitive within the year.

          • Mike

            I agree completely, but for me the Df is a sign that Nikon doesn’t have anything ready for 2014 just yet.

            Though I’m sure they are working on something: Nikon 1 is one giant beta test.

            • Spy Black

              That failed miserably.

    • El Aura

      You mean compact like the Samyang 10 mm f/2.8 and 16 mm f/2?

  • http://kyleclements.com/ Kyle Clements

    Finally! Nikon has an assortment of standard and wide primes that are all “D” lenses, they are rather old and in need of an update. I hope this is the start of a trend.

    • silmasan

      One thing I like the most about Nikon’s current lineup is the value one could get with the f/1.8G primes… 28/50/85 and now we’ll have 35 as well :)

      • Kyle Farris

        A 24mm f/1.8G (or even 20mm f/2G) and 135mm f/2G would complete the system IMO. We’d have 20/24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 105, and 135. It would be my dream. I can dream, right?

        • broxibear

          Hey Kyle,
          I don’t think you have to dream, you just have to wait…I think the 24mm and 135mm will be the next ones up. Nikon’s relese dates an announcements were thrown in the air after the floods and earthquake, it was hinted at when they said the Df was delayed.

          • Kyle Farris

            Do you think they’ll try and get crazy and make a decent 20mm f/1.8? I know Sigma has one but it’s pretty much complete garbage wide open. I also know Nikon has made a 105mm f/1.8 in the past. Also not great at f/1.8 but it’s certainly possible. I’m pretty sure 135mm at f/1.8 would be a very “sizable” lens (even if it is only 1/3 stop brighter than f/2). So, I guess a whole line up of f/1.8′s would be my dream.

            Hell, they should just make the Nikkor 20mm-135mm f/1.8G AF-S with Nano coating and be done with it. #physicsisabitch

            • broxibear

              I don’t know if there’s enough of a market for the 20mm whether it’s f/2.8 or f/1.8 for Nikon to make it. I had a quick look at stock levels for the 20mm AFD f/2.8 here in the UK and there’s plenty around.
              But in saying that they surprised, or should I say shocked, us all with the 58mm f/1.4.
              I think a 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm 135mm f/1.8 is a fantastic range of lenses (not sure about the 24mm and 135mm being f/1.8 though, might be too expensive)

            • Kyle Farris

              Agreed. I highly doubt the 135mm f/1.8. I think the 24mm @ f/1.8 is probable.

  • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

    Nice.

    That’ll be more than welcome on my Df

    • Matteo Barducci

      I hope in a “Special Edition” livery to match my silver Df…

      • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

        Do you think the silver ring makes a difference? I’ve got both the SE and the original (thanks to Nikon forcing me to buy the kit in Switzerland) and I’m not sure the silver grip adds to the overall design.

        • Matteo Barducci

          Well, having both the SE kit lens and the old AF-D 135mm f 2.0 DC the two lenses seems to be twins… Altough my favourite lens to match the Df is the pancake 45mm f 2.8 Ai-P(silver).

          • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

            How is the weight of the 135mm f 2.0 DC on the Df? I looked at that lens a few times.

            • Matteo Barducci

              Well, that combo seems to be very well balanced. I use it only for serious portrait work, so for 99% of the times the lens that rests on the body is the 45mm…

            • Spy Black

              I use my 135 for comical portrait work…

            • Matteo Barducci

              :-P

  • KiwiJoe

    Considering that the DX lens is rather small and can cover the FX image circle if you’re OK living with the heavy vignetting and barrel distortion (it was over-engineered for DX in my opinion), then I hope that the new FX lens isn’t going to be much more than $200-300USD. I certainly don’t want a bulky $600 lens, not too unlike the recent 28mm f1.8.

    • Pat Mann

      Should be a much simpler and a bit more compact lens than the 28 – I’m guessing priced more like the 85 or a tad less. This is a very important focal length. If they only go for low performance with a $200-300 lens that underperforms the 24-70 at 35mm there will be lots of people disappointed by the potential on the new sensor cameras – I certainly would be. They do have to acknowledge the price point of the Sigma but don’t expect anything close to the DX lens.

  • pmac

    Price and prefotmance will have to be good to tempt people away from the sigma. Was planning on picking up a 35 in the next few months. Not sure if I shpukd wait or just go for the sigma

  • GUEST

    Absolutely great news! Love that move….Hopefully they’ll throw in a 24 1.8G FX too as a lighter and cheaper alternative….
    Generally i think nikon should concentrate on buiding their new cameras as light as possible, on the lenses and on beeing complete in terms of built in features wlan, gps, different crop modi, vertical grips with slot for two batteries like in the sony a7 and for a thrid memory card, swivel and tilting lcds even in pro cams like the successor of d800 etc. Particularly they should also work hard on improving their android/ios wifi implementation and the remote functions with smartphones. Also they should improve live view functions in comparison to mirrorless EVFs live histogramm, under/overexposed pixels, showing and changing gradiaton curves etc.and finally implementing TOUCHSCREENS! With regard to the competition with mirrorless cams (em-1,x-series fuji and especially sony a series a7, upcoming a8 and a9) they should be innovative and getting unique by closing the “gaps” in their already great lens lineup e.g. updating the 24-70 2.8 VRIII, updating the fx uww zooms 14-24 2.8 with filter threat and a better 16-35 f4 vrIII according to the new sensor generation resolution of d800(e) and upcoming cams,105 1.8, 135 1.8, 150 2.0 macro, 200 2.0 macro, new 16 2.8 fx fisheye, 15/16, 18, 20 1.8 or even some 1.4 primes (more bulky but make nikon system outstanding), new tilt and shift lenses….

    Lot’s of stuff to do in order to have a chance that dslrs will survive the next ten years and having a chance against the “mirrorlessmania”….time will tell us if nikon do their homework….

    • jr456

      Things like touch screens and swiveling/tilting LCDs are foolish to have on pro-build cameras. Prosumer cameras maybe but I definitely don’t want more features likely to render my camera useless if they snap or stop working.

      I want simple hardened buttons like on the current pro models and a screen that isn’t going snap off if someone bangs into your camera.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/kgnixer niXerKG

    Been waiting for this to happen.

    It was only a matter of time. They had to wait long enough for the 35mm f/1.8 DX to get “old”.

    Might consider selling off my f/1.4G.

  • O.

    I bet this new 35mm will leave the 1.4 in terms of sharpness and resolution completly in the dust.

    • peterw

      interesting thought

    • Mike

      Shouldn’t be hard. The Sigma 1.4 Art version does already. And for less cost. Nikon’s challenge is pricing it to compete with the Sigma 1.4. Nikon 1.8 or Sigma 1.4 for the same money…. that is the buying question. It’s easier if the The Nikon 1.8 is less than Sigma’s 1.4. Some will prefer the rendering that 1.4 has over 1.8. On that note, I find Nikon’s 1.8 lenses very sharp, but rendering is clinical. Where as the 1.4 lenses often have more aperture blades giving a nicer bokeh, and generally more “magic” to the image wide open. The Sigma 1.4 is sharper than the Nikon version wide open but Nikon users report a nicer over all image. (Although I have the Sigma and love it). Nikon needs a home run with this one.

    • jimmy

      no evidence whatsoever of this assertion, along with all the other gushing on this thread.

  • DafOwen

    Woo – quite fancy a wide angle, wide aperture prime.

    Interested – what would people choose 24mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8 (assuming they may be similar price)?
    I have a 50 1.4G
    So would likely go for 24.

    • http://500px.com/yoan_mitov/ Yoan

      I’d choose the 28/1.8 :P

    • peterw

      using a 35 and a 85 is the classical approach for travel and street.
      24 is totally different from 35. 35 yields more unsharpness possibilities, and is more suitable for people photography. It is wider than 50 by quite a margin.

      24 is a rather specialistic lens. For pure joy, you should try the 1,4 ;). You should dare to put your noice in the subject thought.

      (I prefer a zoom in that area for more flexability: every mm in any direction and sense makes such a huge difference in back-ground.)

      • peterw

        noice should be nose ;)

        silly mistake, probably more…. sorry, non-native.

    • Ian Dangerzone

      I’d take a 24, but would prefer 20 or even wider. Nikon’s 14mm and 20mm are getting a little long in the tooth.

  • Peter

    Good news, I was thinking about the Sigma too. But now will wait for the Nikkor 1.8/35mm. By the way, admin: Any news on the V3???

  • markus lajer

    Lovely, I wanted a 35mm for my D7000, but im considering going FF. i’ve waited for something like this!

  • dgr

    135 next please.

    • Lcky

      ED-N 1.8 please

      • Padaung

        f1.8 would be big, very heavy and expensive. I would expect it to be another f2. Whatever though, it would be great if the 135 was the next lens to be updated – along with 35mm, one of my favourite focal lengths.

        • Padaung

          And a pancake 40mm would be wonderful too. The Canon version of this lens is amazing.

        • Lcky

          At 1.8 Likely comparable to my 180 2.8 AIS ED! Except faster and closer focus I’m sure. Beautiful dream.. ;D

    • Bret M

      I’d love a replacement 105 f/2 DC with AF-S and N coating. I’d certainly pay $1000 or a bit more for something like that. Bonus points if it focuses a bit closer than the older model, if it makes something respectable like 1:4 I’d be selling my 105 macro too.

  • Marijn

    This will be THE lens when i upgrade to a D600!

  • Gary

    Any news of the TC14 replacement that was rumoured here a month or so ago?

  • FM

    If this lens will be good and cheap as the dx brother….. AAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!

  • Drazen B

    Nice. Great news for Nikon street shooters.

    If the recent 28mm f/1.8 is anything to go by, it will be a gold-ring lens with Nano coating and shouldn’t cost the Earth. I don’t expect it to be small, though…but here’s hoping that it will.

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Well said brother…my thoughts too.

    • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

      Nano coating would be nice, though I wonder how it would be priced if that were the case?

      • Drazen B

        Probably similar price to the 28mm f/1.8G which comes with Nano coating…around $600-650 mark, maybe.

        • silmasan

          28/1.8G is $700 (ok, 699.95) though, unless you get it on discount (which i haven’t seen a lot on this item)

          • Matador

            No they are not. They have been selling for anything between $600-700, depending on the markets and countries.

    • broxibear

      Hi Drazen B,
      I wouldn’t read too much into the “Gold Ring”, this subject came up a few years ago on nikonrumors (you’ll find it somewhere in the archives)…I contacted Nikon about it at the time, and they said on modern lenses the gold ring was nothing but cosmetic and didn’t signify anything to do with the quality of the lens.

      • Anónimo

        Strange they produce such a statement…do you think we shall think the same about N (nano coating)?
        If so, the idea of a professional type of lenses from Nikon would be just a matter of cash income for the company with no benefits for the customer…a rather compromising assumption…

        • Dpablo unfiltered

          You’re right. I painted a gold ring on one of my lenses and it’s much sharper now. I attribute it to flare reduction. So now I’m in the market for a gold camera…

      • callibrator

        Not sure where you got that information from, but it’s ridiculous to state something like that.
        Shall the Canon say the same about their red-ring L-lenses?

        The ‘person’ you spoke to and told you that cr@p is not much further from an idiot.

        • broxibear

          Hi callibrator,
          Contact Nikon and ask them, I have no idea about Canon and their L lenses…or search through the nikonrumors archives, you’ll find it in there somewhere.

  • TheInconvenientRuth

    If it is the same quality/price range as the 28/1.8G (probably a tad cheaper – easier to make) it’ll be a homerun for Nikon.

  • Bruno

    Finally….

  • Pat Mann

    The most important lens to qualify Nikon DX as a complete system would be a 24mm f/1.4 DX (See Fujifilm lens lineup for some guidance here, Nikon). An 18mm f.2 (see Fuji, MFT) and 50-135 f/2.8 (see Pentax) would come close behind. Then a 12mm f/2.8 (Hello Zeiss+Fujifilm) And I wouldn’t mind an upgrade to the 16-85 to f/4, which if it’s REALLY GOOD would bypass the 50-135 f/2.8 given the low-light performance of the new cameras (and the expectations for the D400). People need a DX upgrade path to commit to DX. FX is not necessary for 95% of my shooting. I might wind up with an FX camera with a lens or two for special applications that require what I used to consider medium-format performance, but a full system upgrade for me is way more expensive than shifting to another brand of APS-C camera for everything but birding lenses. But Nikon DX (likewise Canon APS-C) right now is a dead-end system that I’m not putting any more money into until that changes. Sorry, Nikon, but it is. The lenses to make a complete system just aren’t there, and the top-of-the-line camera just isn’t any more. I love my D300s, but the sensor is way behind the times, and there is right now no upgrade that meets or exceeds its key specifications that I depend on.

    • stoooopid

      fully agree. I love my D7000. But I don’t want to buy FX lenses for it (too big, to expensive). And Nikon doesn’t make good DX lenses in the FL I am interested in (but I do love my 35mm f/1.8 – every DX shooter should have this lens). They definitely need wide angle primes. Look at what Rokinon did the the 16mm f/2 lens for DX. Come on Nikon – just help us out – I don’t want to switch to full frame, and I don’t want to switch brands.

    • ereshoping

      Totally agree. Ive bought my last DX camera and lens.

      There is a very good possibilty I will also move to another brand for my next system purchase.
      Cant see anything to keep me in the Nikon camp.

    • FXNotNeeded

      If Nikon and Canon are unwilling to support the crop sensor format, with good lenses, they really need to make their camera’s focus systems opensource. Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron have no problem making good crop sensor lenses.

      • desmo

        a 35mm Fx lens works as well on the Dx as Fx,
        (but not the other way around)
        theres really no need for separate Dx lens in this focal length
        it’s a waste of Nikon’s time and drives up cost to the consumer by manufacturing and inventorying two separate products

        • Pat Mann

          A 35mm lens for FX is much more complicated than one for DX because it has to cover more than twice the image area, with a much wider angle of view. It needs to do this without degrading image quality at the edges and corners, adding distortion, or adding significant curvature of field or vignetting.
          I agree that FX vs DX makes much less difference at 85mm and beyond since the view angles are relatively narrow and the lens formulas are similar, but a high quality 35mm f/1.8 DX lens can be made and sold for half the price of one for FX.
          The FX lens should do very well on DX, for those who want a lens for both formats and are willing to pay for it. I’ve never had much use for the normal lens angle of view, and never bought the 35 DX lens. I’ll probably pick this one up to use on both formats.

    • Mike

      Those DX lenses are never going to happen because Nikon has no intention to make a viable system out of DX. They want you to upgrade to a D610, end of story. Nikon sees crop sensors as an onramp rather than a system.

      You’d be better off just switching to Fuji if you want those lenses on an APS-C camera.

      On the other hand you can buy the Pentax 50-135/2.8 for Nikon under the Tokina brand. They sell used for $400 and the optics are phenomenal. I don’t see why you’d wait for a Nikon version of the same lens. The optics are far better than any DX lens Nikon has ever made.

      The Sigma 30/1.4 is close-ish to 24/1.4 and you can get the excellent Tokina 11-16/2.8 for your wide angle needs.

      If that is not enough for you, stop waiting around and switch systems. I’d recommend biting the bullet to full frame, or choosing one of the many excellent Olympus or Fuji cameras.

  • AM

    Just ordered yesterday the 28mm f/1.8G to complete the f/1.8G trio. Now it seems it will become a quartet. Nothing more to do but start saving.

  • peterw

    I’ld like it to be mechanically more like a 50 F1,4 or 85 F1,8G and not at all like the ‘cheap’ 28 F1,8G: yuk. Price might be like the 50 F1,4 or a bit less. If it is above 500 euro like the 28, I’ll carry the heavy Sigma with joy,
    otherwise… play ball.

    Good news admin.
    finally

  • http://www.povazanphotography.com/ Jozef Povazan

    Let’s the f1.8 beat his big brother f1.4 in sharpness and Nikon shoots themselves to the knee again like with 50f1.8G :) LOL

    • Joseph Li

      and the 85 f/1.8G….come on, like the same score in Dxomark.com? those guys are smoking something

    • Studor13

      I have both the 50mm f1.8 and f1.4.

      The sharpness differences (on a D800) is a non issue. The main difference is that one is 2/3 rds of a stop faster than the other.

      This is what you are paying for.

  • Dogbert62

    Excellent… one of three that I am hoping for…
    next up, 24mm 1.8G FX
    landscape on FX
    street on DX
    the 1.8 end would only need to be clean for the DX circle
    Finally the 300mm f4 with VR

  • BRNSMRF

    Neat but I’m already in love with my 28 1.8. Very underrated lens

  • rt-photography

    probably another boring variation of those crap 18-105mm kind. more than anything dx needs WA primes.

  • broxibear

    I think this is Nikon catching up from the delays caused by the flooding and earthquake problems at their factories.
    I’m sure the FX 135mm and 24mm won’t be too far either.
    The problem they have is who is going to spend the extra cash on the f/1.4 versions when the f/1.8 versions are testing as good as, if not better, at a fraction of the price ?…there are a lot of f/1.4 lenses appearing on the secondhand market already in the UK.

    • Spy Black

      The 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor is not a good lens. Especially for it’s price. If you’re seeing a lot of them on the secondhand market, it’s probably because those owners replaced it with the Sigma.

      • broxibear

        Hey Spy Black,
        It’s the 50mm and 24mm f/1.4 lenses that seem to be appearing in numbers used.
        I’ve never used the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 and don’t know anyone who has one…it’s a bit of an odd focal length for me.

        • silmasan

          It is odd, indeed, just like 13, 21, 25, 45, 55, 85, 105 and 135… ;)

        • Joseph Li

          35mm is a perfect focal length for weddings, great for environmental portraiture

          • broxibear

            Hi Joseph Li,
            I didn’t say or mean it was an odd focal length for everyone, just me in what I do. I use a 24mm, 50mm and 70-200mm and the 35mm is an inbetween length that doesn’t work for me.

            • Joseph Li

              Yep i can certainly see you skipping 35 if you work with 24 and 50 :)

        • Spy Black

          I thought you were implying the 35mm f/1.4 was showing up on the secondhand market by your remark.

          • broxibear

            Hey Spy Black,
            No I meant 24mm and 50mm f/1.4s…there’s a lot of 50mm AFD f1.8s too.
            I always keep an eye out incase you see something that’s too good too miss, a lot of people buy lenses that they never use and end up selling and they’re practically new…rareley the ones that I might want though, lol ?

      • Joseph Li

        The Nikon 35 f/1.4G is a decent lens, just not as good as the Sigma. Money is a non issue for me, and I dumped the nikkor 35 and never looked back

        • genotypewriter

          Do post here first time you start experiencing issues with your new Sigma lens.
          Few people like you jumped the gun and did the switch not thinking about long term ownership issues with Sigma lenses.

          Oh and please don’t tell me how this time Sigma got it good and built a mechanically superior lens to their previous models.

          • Joseph Li

            Sure I will, or other sigma 35 owners. As soon as ours start failing you will see the internet effect. But I think it has 4 year warranty, so plenty of time to find out. Besides , for $900, the lens has already paid for itself 5 times since I owned it. Jumped on the gun? What exactly are you guys waiting for. If it’s starts to fail after 2 years just get it serviced by sigma sell it on eBay, lose $400 and move on. In the mean time,, the lens is generating awesome images which the clients love and paid for, that’s the most important.

          • Andrzej Lukowiec

            You can live much longer with Sigma… Mount conversion service and you could use it with your next camera brand :D

      • Pablo Ricasso

        “The 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor is not a good lens.”

        Doing comedy much?

        • Spy Black

          It’s not. Not for it’s price. I’m not saying it’s a horrible lens, but compared to the Sigma, or even the Samyang, certainly not worth it. Those other lenses have better falloff, optical correction, better CA, and smoother bokeh. No doubt if you want a modern 35mm f/1.4 optic, the Sigma is the way to go, for almost half it’s price. If you can live with a MF lens, the Samyang is the ticket, for a quarter of it’s price.

  • Kab

    Ordered the Sigma yesterday, cancelled it 5 minutes ago. Interesting!

    • jr.samples

      Without even holding it, reviews, and testing it…your gonna buy? Logic.

      • Kab

        I didn’t imply that. Of course I’ll wait for reviews, as I allways do. It’s good to have alternatives and I can wait a little longer.

  • TR_T-Rex

    Admin: What is the likelihood of this lens having VR like the Canon equivalent?

    For the very high-res of D800, VR is always welcome in my opinion, and looking at the Canon lens, it does not add too much bulk and weight to a 35mm FX lens (though that one is f/2). I can stomach the price difference for VR to counter the blurry images more prominent in D800 where using higher shutter speeds is recommended.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      There is no way for VR on this lens.

      • TR_T-Rex

        Why? How are you so sure? If Canon did it, why Nikon would not?

        • rt-photography

          very hard to impossible to design very large aperture lenses with VR because the mount opening is the limit.

          when you get the chance, put a nikon vs canon camera side by side and youll see how much bigger the canon opening is.

          its possible to do it with manual focus but adding the SWM chokes it and VR cant be done together

          • TR_T-Rex

            Let’s leave very large (f/1.4) aperture lenses aside and focus on less large (f/2) lenses. Do you still think it is “very hard to impossible to design” f/1.8 or f/2 prime lenses with VR? If you think like this for certain focal lengths in particular, then which focal lengths in your opinion are more prone to the flange distance and/or mount opening limitations which prevent manufacturing f/1.8 or f/2 primes with VR?

            • rt-photography

              aperture is aperture no matter what focal length the lens is. the length of the lens changes but the opening is the same. I think if it was AFD it wouldnt be an issue but the AFS adds to the build of the lens. and its just not possible with VR. I think f/2.8 is pushing it. might be possible at f/2 but im not certain the sigma lens theyll launch will be f/2. and also the lens apertures are never accurate. it says f/2.8 but the effective aperture is more like 3.2 or 3.5.

            • Drazen B

              “…and also the lens apertures are never accurate. it says f/2.8 but the effective aperture is more like 3.2 or 3.5…”

              I started to believe what you wrote had some merit and made sense before I read this.

              I reckon the FX cameras are also effectively more like a DX cameras…eh?

            • Matador

              Agree, what a silly statement to make.

            • rt-photography

              you and drazen are both morons its obvious.

              look at Thoms review

              http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-70-200-VR-II-lens.htm

              do ctrl f then type 3.2 and you will get to what he says of the light transmission.

              btw, you both just got schooled

            • Pablo Ricasso

              You are a confused young person, who doesn’t really understand the difference between the f-stop and t-stop.

              Now please stop babbling before you lose that little bit of credibility you have left.

            • rt-photography

              so then if you ever look at pophoto reviews they note the lenses true aperture and while the camera shows the numbers we know the real aperture is always off a bit. for instance the 80-200 AFS they reviewed years back was more like a 3.2 than a 2.8. light transmission wise. before you speak do your homework. you obviously have no idea what youre talking about. no lens is perfectly at spec to the aperture they write.

            • TR_T-Rex

              I cannot speak for Matador and Drazer, but I know that t-stop and f-stop are different things. Even Thom Hogan refers to “3.2″ as t-stop in the article you refer as the t-stop value. T-stop does not change the actual phyical size of aperture, i.e. f-stop, which my question was about. If you think that manufacturing f/2 or bigger FX prime lens for Nikon F mount is not possible due large/very large f-stop, that’s fine. You are entitled to such opinion. But going further and relating this to t-stop has got nothing to do with the feasilbility of such lens.

            • rt-photography

              I didnt say anything about manufacturing large aperture lenses not being possible. I said making very large apertures and adding VR and SWM is very hard to make as the mount isnt big enough.
              if it was AFD it might be possible but with SWM I think its more difficult. I also think the largest aperture with SWM wont pass f/1.4 but they might find a way to do a 1.2. I doubt it though.

              when im talking about the lens aperture, it can say 2.8 but because of the light transmitting and loss of some of it, its not exactly as it says. I may not explain it properly but the numbers it shows isnt exactly what we get. there is loss of light and its not what we think.

              I know what im talking about and I know what I said. dont try to correct me.

              fstop is the physical size. tstop is transmission of light we should think that the amount of light that goes in is 2.8 at 2.8 but since the lens loses some, its not what were getting.

            • TR_T-Rex

              Are you aware you tried to educate people on an irrelevant subject what we (at least I) already know about and somehow connected it to lens design on which has it has no role at all (unless we are talking about a cine lens where the lenses are marked with t-stops and not f-stops)??

              Anyway, I got my answer from the admin who has confirmed the lens would not have VR based on the rumor, and not on physical restrictions like you suggested. Let’s end the discussion.

            • Drazen B

              “I” don’t have idea what I’m talking about?

              Go back to your first post, check your facts, but this time check them good, then come back and apologize for brain fart before you brand someone else as someone who ‘have no idea what he is talking about’…

            • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

              Did you know that ƒ is not aperture, but focal length?

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

            • TR_T-Rex

              Good point. He disregarded this completely and opined that Nikon mount is not suitable for accomodating full-frame prime lenses whose apertures are bigger than 2.8. Not to mention the more a lens’s focal length gets wider or longer from standard focal lengths, the more its design would get complicated, hence SWM and mount opening is not the only factor determining the design.

              Leaving this argument aside, I think Nikon makes a mistake by not offering this lens with VR. I used to think VR is not necessary for wide angle lenses, but when it comes to D800 it is always appreciated regardless of the focal length. Because the rule of thumb (matching your shutter speed with focal length) does not always work with this camera and the approx. 2-stop advantage gained through VR can be used towards realizing this rule.

            • http://inthemistphoto.com/ InTheMist

              Right. But actually some of the comments made me think. I learned some things too.

              For example, that thingie that we call the aperture also isn’t the really the aperture, it’s the diaphragm, but it is used to control the lens aperture by reducing the EFFECTIVE diameter of the lens:

              “A device called a diaphragm usually serves as the aperture stop, and controls the aperture. The diaphragm functions much like the iris of the eye – it controls the effective diameter of the lens opening.”

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture#In_photography

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          You have to trust me on that one :)

          • broxibear

            No…I don’t believe a word you say, lol. :)

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              :)

          • TR_T-Rex

            OK, I trust no matter what. Please just tell me if I should trust based on the rumor you got or the unfeasibility of manufacturing such lens as claimed by rt-photography below. Or both?

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              no, just based on the rumor

            • Neopulse

              Rofl

    • looh

      Unless you’d pay $800 too.

      • TR_T-Rex

        That figure is still less than the Sigma version and I’d definetely pay that if it performs better especially equal to Sigma and has VR, which is crucial for D800.

  • D800Eowner

    Hopefully it will be closer to the 50mm price than the 85mm or 28mm. It would be awesome if it was $250!

    • Imperious Images

      Awesome, but not likely. They don’t want to completely kill the sales of the 35/1.8 DX. Otherwise no one would buy the DX version for the crop bodies. My guess would be in the $350-400 range

  • Carlos

    The only alternative today (except the 1.4) is the f/2 D FX with a relative good price. This new 1.8 is wellcome.

    • whisky

      for anything other than a D800, there are many cost-effective alternatives. you really can’t go wrong with any version (pre-Ai, Ai, Ais) of this classic lens. Nikon’s simply updating the 35mm f/2~ish to match the new threshold demanded by the D800.

      • mooh

        It’s always good to have SWM and full time manual focus though.

  • Glenn

    I’ll be on the look out during the CP+ Yokohama. Based on the current Nikon f1.8G primes, the weight should be similar or close to the 28mm or 50mm f1.8G.

    http://www.cpplus.jp/en/

  • Gabor Takacs

    I am glad to see you happy FF shooters, but I am still waiting for a cheap 24/1.8G for DX.

    • Mike

      Never going to happen.

      • Gabor Takacs

        Five years ago we tought Nikon will never launch 70-200/f4… So who knows?

        • mooh

          Yeah who knows but beware of your word choice – The lens is totally possible, but could hardly be “cheap”.

          Unless you have a different standard for “cheap”: the 70-200/4 goes for $1400.

    • Global

      I think Nikon should just make a 24/2.8 DX for you, to keep it in budget. If its very compact, Nikon could make this an FX and serve both markets.

  • Pipe Cleaner Arms

    Finally, I can leave the 2,000 pound 24-70 at home. I hope this lens is made of the thinnest, lightest plastic possible

  • Kevin

    this is a great addition to the nikon df. if it comes out, I can get one for my D90 for now… going to skip the 35mm 1.8DX

  • Jon Ingram

    I expect the new nikkor to be priced just at or below the sigma. It will be significantly lighter than both lenses.

  • iNSIXIANGMY

    I am so happy that Nikon has been refreshing their Primes. This is another one that will go into my bag with the 28, 50, and 85 1.8′s

  • phosgene

    its gonna have to be either really amazing or really cheap to compete with the sigma 35/1.4

    • Imperious Images

      Exactly what I was thinking! That lens has been getting great reviews. Nikon would be wise to keep it under $900 especially since there’s is a 1.8

      • mooh

        The 28/1.8 which is obviously a lens harder to make was priced at $600 (suprising many at the time of announcement as it’s packed with latest technology). So no worries this one may just be around $500-550 range.

  • Delie

    so long as it’s either better or cheaper than the sigma 35mm 1.4, then it sounds like good news to me :)

  • Ronan

    What does the internet say!? Here goes…

    Why isn’t it DX! FX is WAY too expensive!!!
    No aperture ring! My D version is SO MUCH BETTER!!!
    Is it available in ‘retro’ colors???
    It’s too expensive, my $50 #%@$& is better!
    D600 sucks.
    This won’t AF properly on my D###/D####, tested in store, promise, sucks.
    Df is too expensive (but i till bought one after complaining for 2 weeks on here).

    Voila, all condensed in one post, so everyone else can now move on :)

    //Sarcasm

    • Ric

      you’re missing the no D400 rant.

      • saywhatuwill

        But those people already moved to Canons because they threatened to do that a while ago since the D400 never came out.

        • looh

          So they switched over just to buy the 7D with the history-proven, soon-to-celebrate-the-5th-birthday CMOS sensor?

  • Ronan

    Looks like a promising lens, if the price is right, it will sell like hot cakes.

  • Crocodilo

    Hurray! I sold all my stuff to get the 28/50/85 trio, and kept no other lenses, but a 35 1.8 would be the icing on the cake, the flag on the castle, assuming a price point and quality in line with the f1.8 wonder trio. I paid a little over 200€ for the 50mm, 400€ for the 85mm and 600€ for the 28mm, so a street price below 500€ seems very doable by Nikon.

  • Michael Choong

    Actually I need a 20mm 1.8

    • JohnH

      I’d gladly take a 20/2.8G . . . with improved corners

      • Global

        Cant we compromise on a 20/2, guys? Seriously.. theres no need to bicker about half a stop between friends!

        I really want a 20/f2 or 20/1.8 if its not too heavy.

  • Joseph Li

    Yet another cheap and sharp f/1.8 primes. This is awesome stuff for budget full frame shooters

  • Gert

    I hope the next new lens is a 135mm 1.8 or ..

    • Joseph Li

      Cant wait for the Sigma to release the 135 f/1.8 OS…just cant wait!

      • umeshrw

        It is like as if Nikon is out with vengeance after sigma……

  • saywhatuwill

    Let me guess, this lens will be heads and shoulders better than the f/1.4G version just as many feel the 85mm f/1.8G is better than 85mm f/1.4G.

  • Back to top