Amazon is listing this lens from AllAbout Electronics for $524.37,plus $5.49 shipping no less.Do any of you think somebody in their right mind would pay that much for this lens?
AF-S DX 35 1.8G
(18 posts) (11 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Well, I am looking for this lens, but I certainly don't need it that badly. I'll wait until B&H, Adorama, or Amazon have it for it's normal ~200 price. Will anyone pay over $500? Oh, I'm sure someone will.
Posted 3 years ago # -
jesus. . . .I"m glad I pre-ordered, $199 shipped ages ago. . . .I no longer wait for Nikon lenses to actually come out and get tested, I just assume they'll rock. . .
Posted 3 years ago # -
Most of them do, don't they. As I've said (written??) before, the lenses now are SOOOOO much better in general than when I started in photography, you almost can't go wrong with Nikkor lenses (well, except for some of the hobbyist lenses, which are not quite up to snuff)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Apparently, it's also a $500+ lens at J and R, but they give you a 50%+ discount on it, making it $220, last time I checked.
Posted 3 years ago # -
It is out of stock, as everywhere else... I placed an order with Adorama and Amazon, hopefully one of them will get me one soon...
Posted 3 years ago # -
man, maybe I should sell mine used on Adorama and put the proceeds towards a 70-200?!!
Posted 3 years ago # -
That's just to much. Can be had on ebay at for around $280... still on the high side if you ask me.
Posted 3 years ago # -
At 10:15 p.m. PDT there is a imported version now in stock on B&H Photo for $199.95.
I do not know how long they will last.
Posted 3 years ago # -
can someone explain me why this lens is so desirable? I used to have the 50/1.4 and it was one of the less used lenses I ever had - so I wonder that 35 can differ too much from that one, as it's only 15mm difference.
Posted 3 years ago # -
OK, one my D300 a 35mm lens is app like a 50mm would have been on my film SLR or FX SLR. This lens is sharp, light and fast. Great for group shots, shots were you have less available light, shots that you desire less DOF. I am going to get one.
It is also fun to get out with that lens only and spend a few hours getting creative. Now you have no zoom but only your legs to position your camera at the best position and distance
So if you shot DX go out and get that lens if you can and have fun.
Pete
Posted 3 years ago # -
"Now you have no zoom but only your legs to position your camera at the best position and distance"
While I agree with your reasons for wanting this lens ( I want one too), statements like the above bother me. This entirely depends on what you're shooting.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Gentoo: You are right, it depends on what your are shooting, but that being said I have gone out shooting with only my 50mm on my film SLR and enjoyed the challenge that this setup gave me. I will do the same with my new 35mm when I get it. Try it out for yourself.
Pete
Posted 3 years ago # -
I guess there's something wrong we me, as for me camera and lenses are only tools, and instead of loosing time on setting up challenges (OTOH using a 35mm for shooting tigers could be fun:) ) I prefer to use proper tools for proper jobs. With my previous statement I just wanted to know, why people are so desperate about this lens, that are even willing to pay twice the price to have it. So what I understood from bmxdad, this lens gives a good quality to weight ratio with a decent f stop and the main usability is taking group pictures. If I'm wrong please correct me.
Posted 3 years ago # -
"I will do the same with my new 35mm when I get it. Try it out for yourself."
I will definitely give it a good test when I finally get one. Won't work much for wildlife though lol
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yeah, it's pretty the much bang for the buck factor. The (new) 50mm prime is more than twice the cost of this one, and there isn't anything within the focal length or speed for DX that doesn't cost more than $200 that autofocuses.
Posted 3 years ago # -
OK, my first camera a Canon AE-1 was purchased with a 50mm lens, that was the only tool that I had enough money to get at that time. Zooms were expensive and I was saving to get a 35mm lens and later a 135mm. I still have the camera and the lenses, but have not used them for years.
Anyway I had to learn to get the best shots with that 50mm lens and you should try to go out for a day, evening with only one lens like the 35mm DX. You can do a lot with that lens if you put your mind to it.
For another challenge I have a pinhole lens for my camera, which again is a interesting way to take pictures,
-But most the time I have my backpack with my D300, D80 and a few lenses and will most likely have my 70-200 VR on my D300 and 16-85 VR on my D80. Future lenses will be the 35mm DX a replacement for my older 50mm, something wide angle, Maybe Tokina 11-16 2.8, A longer zoom would be nice or maybe a 1.7 converter for my 70-200
Pete
Posted 3 years ago # -
The new 1.8 is so desirable because it corrects the "flaws" of the 2.0 for 99% of DX users:
Less expensive, faster focus, (slightly) sharper, (slightly) faster, no front element movement, instant manual focus, auto focuses on the discount bodies.That being said - I often see the 35mm F2 AF-D used on craigslist for ~$250. If you're going FX in the next couple of years I'd just go ahead and get that.
I don't think I have ever bought a new lens.Posted 3 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
