Nikon 35mm f / 1.8G AF-S DX Nikkor

Advantages: For me - this is the best portrait painter, oddly enough!
Sharp on the open,
A distinctive advantage is the color rendition and detailing of the objective lens.

Disadvantages: For me they are not.

Comment: Example portrait
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3893/15181692708_d0bb716aeb_b.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5591/15289907455_c6679a6bea_b.jpg

Advantages: 1. Easy and small.
2. Hood included (although it helps infrequently).
3. Aperture. 1.8 is quite a working diaphragm.
4. It can be used as a staffer due to a suitable angle.
5. Extremely cheap.
6. Very fast autofocus.
7. High sharpness, perhaps even higher than Nikon's 50 1.8 D.

Disadvantages: Given the price of the minuses in the lens there. Plasticity does not detract from its strength, lenses with problems with focusing are not so common, and the fact that with a protective filter it desperately glares is completely solved by removing the filter.

Comment: The lens showed itself well on my two carcasses - d5100 and d80. Focusing speed on both high, sharpness throughout the frame, decent boke. The camera with him does not look terribly cool megazerkalkoy, if whom this is important. But even compared with the whale, the dimensions are noticeably reduced. This, of course, is not a 40mm Kenan pancake, which is more like a plug to the bayonet, but still it is very small. Hood without problems twisted to the stowed position. The lens is durable, manual focusing on it is quite convenient, autofocus and completely flawless. Perfect as a replacement for the whale on the first SLR. He will teach you to work with a tiny GRIP and make you look deeper into the photo. On the other hand, even on the machine he gives out shots of very decent quality. Be careful with protective filters - glare in the rooms. For those who are not very sophisticated in photography and who choose between 50mm and 35mm, I would still recommend 35, if you do not have a clear goal to do portraits. The angle of view is very noticeably different from 50 mm. 35mm is the same as 50mm on a full-frame SLR, which means you will have a classic fifty dollars. All successful frames.

Advantages: sharp, relatively cheap, no creaks. Almost completely coincides with the angle of human vision (on the crope), which makes it easier to choose a frame without a camera.

Disadvantages: Chromatic aberrations on the big hole (it is treated programmatically). Probably another distortion, but in ordinary life is not noticeable, only when testing (also treated programmatically)

Comment: Either I was very lucky, or the lens is frightened by the tripod, but the autofocus miss, especially on the big hole IMHO, is not the problem of the lens but of the photographer. When shooting with hands, it is very difficult to keep the camera completely motionless, And given the depth of field equal to 1-2 centimeters with a big hole, the camera shifts between focusing and the picture itself gives the same miss. And here already where the photographer will pull, either backward or forward.All lenses with a marriage can not be, before cursing the glass, check the curvature of the hands

Advantages: 35mm very versatile focal length. Aperture f1.8. Autofocus smart, ultrasonic motor. High-quality assembly, do not be afraid of what is done in heaven. Good grade. The price is good.

Disadvantages: Notable HAs on shiny surfaces. And more like as there are no flaws.

Comment: The lens in the purchase of which there can be no doubt if you decide to change your regular zoom to fixed.
It is universal. You can shoot portraits, landscapes, objects, etc.
In view of the great luminosity, the shutter speed is shortened, and from here less wiggles and pictures will be sharp.
The fact that the lens often misses, then at an open aperture, and it is not surprising because the depth of field is very small, and your slightest movement relative to the subject of shooting will lead to a shift of the focus point .. the picture will be blurred.
An example of a photo - http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4121/133660459.0/0_b5347_73692659_orig

Advantages: 1. Aperture (in conditions where it would be impossible to read a book - it shoots like during the day, true at ISO 1600 and higher, and the shutter speed is around 1 / 5-1 / 10 sec.) But the picture is pretty smooth, without much noise. 2. Size, very compact even with a hood, after 18-200 it seemed that there was simply no lens))) 3. Wonderful background (boke) and creates a feeling of lightness in the whole photo. At the same time in the zone of focus is sharp, I would say NATURALLY-sharp, without artificiality and kinking, but did not notice the soap. 4. I believe that these focal (35 mm) - the golden mean and the so-called "staffer" on the crop (put it on d7000). 5. It focuses already on 15 cm from the front lens (although 30 cm is indicated in the description) and gives a very good picture comparable to fixes (if 1x2 meters you are not going to print an image of a ladybug or a flower). But you need to know that when shooting an object from a distance of 15-20 cm. On the 1.8 aperture diaphragm the depth of field will be about 1 mm, so if you want the bugs, spiders, flowers or jewelry to be completely in the sharpness zone - you need to shrink the aperture to f / 6 or more! 6. Excellent compact and durable hood. 7. 7-petal diaphragm (beautiful circles in the boke). 8. Small filter diameter (52 mm), respectively, not expensive UV filters and others. 9. USM rather as a virtue (but personally, I think that it’s not important at 35 or 50 mm, because usually they do not remove the dynamics, so a screwdriver would not be a problem either). 10. Metal bayonet. 11. On my copy of the vignetting is NO, starting with 1.8 and further.

Disadvantages: 1. Does not photograph himself. Otherwise, everything is expected and especially there is nothing to criticize. 2. It is a pity that it does not fit the full frame, on the other hand, it can be sold along with the carcass, the kit. It is also an option. 3. AF really misses plus or minus 1-2 cm, but on a narrow type of DOF, such as 1.8 or even 2.8, you obviously will not take off figure skating, boxing or running children (too narrow DOF, in my opinion, for such tasks), so for leisurely shooting is fine.

Comment: It performs its tasks, it did not reveal the jambs. The depth of field at 1.8 meters from a distance to the object of 1 m equals literally several millimeters, at a distance of 2-3 m. Probably 1-2 centimeters, due to which it seems that the whole image is not in focus, but this strip of sharply depicted space is very obvious runs like a saw through a tree through the whole image. Very impressive. Of course, if there is an object in the focus area, everything is great, airy, perfectly draws and washes the background (boke). Comparing it with Nikkor’s 35mm f / 2D AF (I don’t see any reason to compare it with 50 mm, because on a cropping of 50 mm, the angle is too narrow (75 mm in fact), then f2 and AF (instead of AF-S) are clearly not 35mm f / 2D AF Nikkor favor, and the price for it is 2-3 thousand more. I already said about USM - I think that this is certainly a plus, but the screwdriver doesn’t rattle in the whole district, as many probably think.Yes, and rush to 35 mm fixes especially nowhere. Well .. let's say, zooming with your feet will take more time than this little one focuses. Case of life. We smoke (I do not smoke myself, but still), and comrade boasts: “I recently bought a Mazda, acceleration to 100 km in 4 seconds! Yes, there was an opportunity to buy 100 thousand cheaper, but acceleration to one hundred in just 6 seconds ... ", to which another friend of mine reasonably responds to him:" Indeed, what would you do in those extra two seconds?! "...)) So, look at everything with the mind and not chase after" the most -the most "if, in fact, in fact, it only takes an extra few thousand from your pocket, but in practice it is not particularly necessary ... All good shots! I hope helped with something to decide.

Advantages: Very good build, albeit China.
Nice equipment: the lens itself, the cover and hood.
Size and weight. Now you can easily carry it in your bag, without worrying that the bulky lens will rest on the side, pull the shoulder down or force the camera to "nod off" on the neck.
Excellent luminosity on the open aperture.
Very beautiful bokeh.
Image quality: with a slightly covered hole, the photos are surprisingly sharp; also pleasing to the eye color rendering.
The focal length is very convenient for universal purposes - it turns out about the same as we ourselves see it. For me personally, fifty dollars would be too.
Autofocus with the possibility of manual adjustments.

Disadvantages: Autofocus often smears.
Pronounced back focus.
Chromatic aberration.
In some pictures - purple halo.

Comment: I took to the Nikon D3100 - now the whale lens is gathering dust in the bag, has never changed this beauty.
As a regular to DX-cameras - the most it.
Adequate price / quality ratio.
I am completely satisfied with the photos and the lens work.

Advantages: I bought a lens as a room portrait to replace a whale 18-55 (take a picture of a child, and of course my wife: D), what can I say, just earth and sky, my wife was delighted and said - "this is exactly what I wanted to get from the SLR ". The photos are very sharp with a beautiful bokeh, plus the process itself becomes more interesting, the depth of field at the minimum focal length is probably 5-6 centimeters, the blur starts further, it starts intensively using manual settings, the creative process has started! If the whale lens is on the car, which in manual mode is almost the same result, then there really is where and with what to experiment.

Disadvantages: Not found.
Perhaps there is not enough experience or have not tried something better, but the only drawback of this lens is that the whale is now gathering dust in its case ...

Comment: I bought a D3100 whale Af-S DX 18-55 VR, now I regret that I didn’t take the bodykit + 35mm f / 1.8G AF-S D right away, do not step on my rake;)

Advantages: - The sharpness, in comparison with the whale 18-55 at equal apertures, the details are worked out much better, the microcontrast is quite good (due to a better resolution), the sharpness at the edges of the picture on small apertures almost does not fall.
- Aperture: the ability to shoot in poor lighting conditions and indoors without a flash (for ISO 200 and acceptable shutter speeds there is not enough bright light from the window). Here, too, can be attributed the creative possibilities that a small DOF gives.
- Pleasant bokeh. Of course, this is a matter of taste, but I like the background pattern. On small diaphragms it is good to shoot portraits, make up with plants.
- Metal bayonet (reliability).
- When focusing, the lenses move inside the lens, climbs nothing to the outside and, accordingly, less dust sucks. The front lens does not spin - you can put a polarik.
- Price. 6700 rubles is just ridiculous (it was exactly the purchase with delivery from a foreign online store that came out).

Disadvantages: - Still, not all details fit perfectly.However, this makes all available Nikon lenses sin (even those that initially work well - after half a year of operation they become a little loose). You just need to be careful about him - and enough for many years.
- A small "barrel". Conditional disadvantage. First, it can only be noticed in specific photographs, and secondly, it is easily corrected in the appropriate editors.
- Small chromatic aberrations. Also conditional. Sometimes they give an additional artistic effect. In most modern models Nikon'ov cleaned automatically. Also cleaned in photo editors.

Comment: Great lens. Small, with a beautiful picture. Light. Cheap. Well suited as a regular. But! You need to be aware that this is a fix: you should take it only if you want to experiment creatively at small diaphragms, and being completely confident that this focal length is suitable.

Advantages: optically sharp, lightweight, small, metallic bayonet, convenient focus, quiet autofocus, price, Nikon native

Disadvantages: Occasionally it turns out not very beautiful background blur, somewhat motley, dazzled in the eyes

Comment: I took it as the first and only lens for a DSLR, took only a few months for it, then used other lenses, but this one remained my favorite, I like the picture from it most of all. Justified expectations at 100%, you can remove almost anything, including in low light. Although there is not enough wide angle for urban landscapes and narrow spaces, one can almost always make a frame (unlike 50mm., Which turn into 75mm on a crochet.) I think that I have to be in the arsenal of any novice photographer. Ideal for exploring the city when you don’t know if you’ll shoot or not and just want the camera to be on hand - small and light, with a camera on a belt does not outweigh the lens down.

Advantages: Light and compact, convenient focal length for DX, almost silent focusing, decent picture quality already on the open aperture, a good design for such a price.

Disadvantages: Slight backlash of the focus ring (within 0.5 mm). Noticeable HA and barrel distortion pictures. Rough image in the area of ​​unsharpness (if it is critical, it is desirable to cover the diaphragm by about half a stop).

Comment: Excellent on-road fix-fix for Nikon DX format SLR cameras. Especially good as a condiment for small DSLRs like D40, D40x, D60 or D3000: this combination resembles a large compact CD with super-duper zoom. At the same time, the camera does not “nod” when hanging on a belt. Compared to the standard 18-55 VR, this lens seemed much less flimsy: it doesn’t dangle anything, it doesn’t slide out and doesn’t suck dust. Pleased metal bayonet with rubber seal. As for sharpness, on my D40 there are no complaints, even on an open diaphragm. The existing flaws in the pictures either do not strain or are removed in the RAW-converter.