Nikon D3300 camera and 35mm f/1.8G lens pre-order options

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G ED lens:

Nikon D3300:

The new Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR II lens can be purchased separately for $196.95.

The new Nikon Coolpix cameras are listed at AmazonAdorama and B&H.

This entry was posted in Nikon D3300, Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • silmasan

    Any image sample leaks for the 35/1.8 ED, admin?

    • I’m interested in this too.

      • Bill M
      • hksfrank

        7 rounded blade , not sure how it compare to sigma 35
        did not see N coating logo on it

        • silmasan

          Actually, the number of blades only affect the shape of the bokeh at smaller apertures. The quality of the transition itself is more affected by the evenness of light across the whole image circle.

          With all due respect, the Sigma 35/1.4 isn’t the best example of this. The Zeiss is better, the Nikon, probably not so much, but still better than Sigma.

          From the Nikon HK page above you can see this is being emphasized (“…produces remarkable bokeh with smooth gradients”), which I hope is addressing this.

          I don’t need it being sharper than Sigma or as flare-resistant as the N-coated units. The new 58/1.4 has this kind of “creamy” and “well-rounded” look, so I’m hopeful…

          • I can’t wait for this lens to be more similar to the 58. It can then get lambasted by all the sigma fanboys about how soft it is wide open. Then, in reality, the images made with the Nikon will be just that much more uncommon… and just that touch sweeter. I’m sure the new 50mm Art Series will only add fuel to this fire.

            • bob2

              Why even listen to the Sigma fanboys–all they think is they got a “great” bargain, given all the bellyaching regarding Nikon’s higher pricing. Hey, Sigma is cheaper than Leica, so why not put Sigma lenses on M bodies?

              You get what you pay for, and it’s not always evident:


              This “spend money on the body but cheapen out on lenses” syndrome is ages old and backwards, IMHO (goes back to the 1970’s or earlier and aimed at newbies). It’s the lenses that determine image quality (everything being equal); it’s the lenses that don’t get outdated in 18 months; it’s the lenses that will be used for years after the camera body is long gone, rendered obsolete; it’s the lenses that retain the resale value while the bodies are disposable.

              I always get a chuckle at the guy (and it’s always a man) proudly displaying the lastest big DSLR with some cheapo third party lens, telephoto zoom, extended out, no less!

              Or just wait a bit until Sigma no longer supports the lens, or it breaks, is incompatible, etc. (see Tamron’s 300mm f/2.8 for example).

              This all comes from my own hard-earned (and sometimes frustrating) personal experience unfortunately.

            • silmasan

              Build quality/reliability aside, some of Sigma’s Apo telephoto lenses are quite a steal though, e.g. the 150 and 180 Macro. Those have drastically different characteristics to Sigma’s own wider angle lenses.

    • Danny

      Ren Kockwell has a review of the 35 1.8g out. I think it’s one of those reviews were he might have not used the product…ahem.

  • Mark

    Guessing at a £499 UK price? Thoughts?

  • Eric Calabros
  • AM

    Now that the 35mm f/1.8G has been released, I think that a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm f/1.8G would have made more sense. 28mm and 35mm are too close each other.
    For somebody who already owns the 28mm and the 50mm, $600 is just too much to justify the 35mm.

    • pj

      Of course that’s a matter of personal preference and shooting style, but I’ve always worked with a 28/35/50 combo. I’m a photojournalist and documentary photographer and other than when I was shooting with long glass for sports or some breaking news, that combo has always served me well. It includes some amount of backup too. If I travel halfway around the world and one of my lenses breaks or gets stolen, with that combo I could easily still work if I lost any one lens.

      I agree it’s pricey, but it’s only a bit more than half the price of the zeiss 35/2 and a bit faster.

      If the corners are sharp (unlike the 35/2D) and the lens doesn’t have any other problems (huge distortion, focus shift, bad field curvature, etc.), I’ll buy one. But of course I wish it were $396!

      • bob2

        +1. I too prefer the 28/35 combo, with the 50 thrown in depending on situation. 24 tends to be too wide and distorting for my style. 28 is just a tad wider, enough for environmental storytelling without being too wide. 35 gives a nice sense of environment yet intimacy when used in close.

        But too bad Nikon does not make the DX equivalents–a major complaint by many about Nikon’s lens choices–you don’t have the respective fast wides in DX–18 and 23mm–which is one reason I never warmed up to DX, despite the size/cost advantage over FX. One reason why m43/Fuji has become popular amongst advanced photographers, IMO.

    • broxibear

      Hi AM,
      I think the next two primes that will get updated from AFD to AFS will be the 24mm and 135mm…As pj points out it is very much personal preference as to 24mm or 28mm, I’ve always been drawn to the 24mm.
      It’ll be interesting to see if they can make the 24mm and 135mm at f/1.8. It’s also interesting to point out that Nikon US on their site say this…
      “The AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G ED completes Nikon’s versatile collection of
      advanced f/1.8 FX-format prime lenses, joining the 28mm, 50mm and 85mm
      versions. All four lenses offer the latest Nikon advancements and
      optical design characteristics, providing consistent performance at each
      focal length: wide-angle, standard and medium telephoto.”
      Is that just marketing or is their use of the word “completes” mean that’s all we’re getting in the FX prime f/1.8 G range ?

  • stormwatch

    D3300 sports a new sensor…some surprises are on the way 🙂

  • Bill M

    Going to wait on the reviwers and invest in a rental before purchasing.

    • Morris

      thats how wise people should do, wait other people to test.

      • silmasan

        Does that mean they need unwise testers to go first? Hehe

        • Fred Flintstone

          Just thank them all for buying the D600 and move on 🙂

      • dgr

        Nothing wrong with waiting on reviews but you still need to make your own assessment.

      • fred

        Think of the impulsive guy who pre-ordered his D600 on announcement (buying blind)…and the more patient guy who waited 6 months before making a buying decision/upgrading. The former may have got the unwanted troubles, the latter knows better..

  • ocking
  • JakeB

    Amazon lists the new Nikon 35 1.8 as a DX ??????

    • Tom

      lol — I just noticed that, too.

  • Austin

    The price of the 35 1.8G ED is so close to that of the Sigma 1.4 A. I’ll have to wait until someone does a comparison. If it’s anything like the 85 1.8G’s performance (I believe it’s still the #1 85mm from DxO Mark, minus that slow AF) I will stick with Nikkor glass.

    • Tom

      Totally — but I’d watch out with the Sigma. Optically its awesome but I worry about them cutting corners in build. Plus if Nikon can limit third-party battery functionality who’s to say they can’t / won’t do so with optics…

    • Aldo

      I don’t doubt the nikon will be awesome… but because of the price it’s gonna come down to whether you need a faster lens or a lighter smaller one.

  • Kynikos

    $600? They must be mental.

    • tsk!

      and very greedy!

    • dgr

      Should it cost more? $1600 for the 1.4g, less than half that for the 1.8G. Plus the 1.8G has ED elements which the 1,.4G doesn’t.

      • Kynikos

        Ok, Son. Sure.
        3x the cost of the DX version.
        $100+ more than the 50 1.4G, $200+ more than 1.4D
        Nikon is trying to bend people over.

        • bending

          yes, it hurts

          but, will feel good at 399

          • Kynikos


        • dgr

          Can’t compare DX and FX prices. You also cannot compare the cost of a 50mm to a 35mm because 50mm has always been cheaper. As far as the D version is concerned it will AF much slower. If you’re okay with shooting any of those options which obviously isn’t the same thing then you can go ahead and save some money.

      • silmasan

        I’ve got a feeling it could be better in some ways than the 1.4G, so it might be a steal at $600 — a hundred dollar more than I expected though but still. Those who want sub $500 can still check out the 35/2D instead 😉

  • AM

    First reviews of the D3300, the 35mm f/1.8G, and the 18-55mm VR II by KR. No image samples, though.

    • One More Thought

      Those “reviews” by KR are not reviews; they are snap opinions posted with about a few seconds of thought, without any use of the camera.

      • AM

        Yes, I know. But, he claims that his samples are this or that. I just wonder if he really got non-production samples for evaluation, or if this one is another of his multiple bluffs.

        • dgr

          He’s just copy and pasting from other reviews. He later adds more specifics if he ever buys it. It’s more for using his links to purchase the gear than anything else.

        • John

          He does not have a sample in his possession. He pre-writes the entire review. It is the same as every review which he changes a FEW things after he gets one. He has already made up his mind about what he thinks of the lens. It is entertainment (and links to Adorama for his income)

  • One More Thought

    The guy on the soundimageplus blog made a good point: this D3300 is actually quite a good deal. It’s lighter than a far more expensive Olympus OMD EM1, with a larger sensor, and a better lens selection.

    It’s really a great alternative to those who want to go small and light, and may be considering some of the mirrorless options.

    In fact one thing I’ve noticed is that both Canon and Nikon have released some very nice sized dslr’s that compete very effectively against the mirrorless market.

    • Aldo

      no body only yet?

    • Jim Z

      The ibis in omd if put in the new Nikons, would make Nikons fly off the shelf so fast they’d be out of stock in a week. Stupid people

    • Andrzej Lukowiec

      It is lighter. Certainly. 37 grams. Cheap plastics are much lighter. But not very tough 😉

  • Patrick Thornton

    Would be nice to buy the D3300 without the kit lens to pair with an existing 35mm 1.8 lens.

  • AM

    When I read that, I interpreted that Nikon is done with f/1.8G primes. I believe that when the 135mm is updated, it will continue being f/2, which will be nice to have anyway.

    • silmasan

      If the new 135 turns out to be a “mini 200/2 VR”, I’d be happy with a 2k price tag (just like Zeiss 135 Apo but with AF, and possibly VR as well)…

  • Mansgame

    Wow, I’m going to camp out outside of Best Buy for this. Is Best Buy still in business BTW?

    • Aldo

      best buy is one of the few retailers who has been able to survive the internet age.

    • Hootie

      BB still has D5100’s brand new for $50 off the orig. price, so this lens would be just right for that. Should this be called VR3 though?

  • Fred Flintstone

    That new 18-55 will suit my D400 perfectly!

  • Back to top