The AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G is a relatively inexpensive fast normal prime for Nikon’s DX SLRs. Its large maximum aperture makes it ideal for shooting indoors without flash, and its built-in AF-S motor means it will autofocus on entry-level Nikon SLRs. It offers a winning combination of high image quality, large aperture and low price, and is therefore a lens which deserves to be on many a Nikon shooter's shopping list.
Nikon AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8 G Lens
Already own this?
This item is in your gearlist!
“ This lens produces finely detailed images at all apertures, focuses quickly and accurately, and handles well in a small, light package.”
- 35mm focal length
- 52.5mm equivalent focal length on DX cameras
- F1.8 maximum aperture; F22 minimum
- Ultrasonic-type AF motor with full-time manual focusing
- 52mm filters
- 0.30m/11.81" minimum focus
- Nikon F mount for for DX DSLRs
|Lens type||Prime lens|
|Max Format size||APS-C / DX|
|Focal length||35 mm|
|Lens mount||Nikon F (DX)|
|Number of diaphragm blades||7|
|Minimum focus||0.30 m (11.81″)|
|Motor type||Ring-type ultrasonic|
|Full time manual||Yes|
|Focus notes||internal rear focus|
|Weight||210 g (0.46 lb)|
|Diameter||70 mm (2.76″)|
|Length||53 mm (2.07″)|
|Materials||Plastic barrel, metal mount|
|Filter thread||52 mm|
|Hood product code||HB-46|
Scoring is relative only to the other lenses in the same category at the time of review.
|Ergonomics and Handling||
The 35mm F1.8G DX delivers impressive performance. It produces finely detailed images at all apertures (although with somewhat low contrast wide open), focuses quickly and accurately, and handles well in a small, light package. As such, it deserves to be on many a Nikon shooter's shopping list for its winning combination of high image quality, large maximum aperture and low price.
Everyday use on Nikon's DX-format APS-C DSLRs, where this sharp and inexpensive 35mm becomes a useful 'standard'.
Not So Good For
Shooting wide open, where CA can be an issue, even with in-camera JPEG correction.
Top Lens without paying Top Dollar
This lens was originally bought in 2011, and having spent 2 years with it, I can safely say that 85% of my street images were taken with this lens. I love its large aperture, light weight, ease of use, fast AF and incredible sharpness. It already yields excellent image quality wide open, but stopped down to f/2.8 the sharpness is simply amazing. With my D7000, movement tracking is very good, with the AFS motor performing very well. However, I do tend to stick with the standard AF-single mode, ...
What a GREAT lens!
Just fantastic, walking arround inside and outside with just this one. Zoom with your feet, and take part of the scene... In the DX mount it makes a PERFECT 50 mm focal distance. Enjoy it, don't be afraid of buying this one.
Must have lens
Must have lens for photography enthusiast... Low light image quality is amazing...
Amazing Lens. Great for close ups with beautiful Bokeh affect. Problems: None at all. Will recommend.
Best Portrait Lens for D3100?
I want the best I can get less than $800 for my nikon d3100. My 35mm 1.8 is ok but isn't giving me quite the creamy shallow depth of field I want. right now I am considering either AF-S version of 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.8 lenses but I cannot decide.. Anyone have any suggestions or thoughts? I typically do model portraiture but am looking to do a lot more family type work such as couples and children. Mostly all outdoor work. Thank you!
Stacey_K wrote: If they are mostly outdoors or you have room indoors, I highly recommend the 85mm f1.8G. I find it's hard to take a bad portrait with that lens :) Stacey, you're just not trying hard enough ;-) I find it easy. Just cut off part of the face, or put it out of focus. That'll ruin any portrait. If you want any more tips on how to ruin a photo, I've probably done it all *chuckle* Continue Reading
HowardChernin wrote: Why not get the 55-200 VR and a SB-400 speed light? You can get some great out of focus backgrounds with the 55-200 set between 135 and 200mm, and the speed light will help you neutralize harsh lighting. You can get them together for less than half of what you would spend on the 85 1.8, and still have money left over for a 50mm 1.4! a cheap slow consumer zoom is guaranteed to produce an awfully busy bokeh . And a SB-400 ?? Please, don't recommend gear just because you have it. The 55-200 + SB400 combo is absolutely useless for portrait shots - the SB400 is a joke - it's head can't tilt and swivel - so you either get raccoon eyes, or a deer in the headlights "quality" of portraits. You might as well use your cell phone for that. Also with the range of 135-200mm, that pathetic excuse for a flash would have trouble even reaching the subject - unless you're doing headshots only. Continue Reading
wlad wrote:.4! a cheap slow consumer zoom is guaranteed to produce an awfully busy bokeh . And a SB-400 ?? Please, don't recommend gear just because you have it. The 55-200 + SB400 combo is absolutely useless for portrait shots - the SB400 is a joke - it's head can't tilt and swivel - so you either get raccoon eyes, or a deer in the headlights "quality" of portraits. I agree with your remark about the SB-400 being useless. The built in flash is going to be better if you're using direct flash because it's less likely to flash blast your subject as badly. The SB-400 bounced from above may be okay but it's going to give potentially nasty shadows under the eyes. It's just not a good flash to bother with owning. I don't have any experience with the 55-200VR, but I've had very pleasing portraits with both 18-70dx @ 70mm and 70-300VR @ any focal length. The trick is simply to put the subject just beyond minimum focus distance and the background farther away - not always going to be ... Continue Reading
Should I go all primes?
Dear All, I am a budding professional photographer, getting paid decent money to support myself and family. I have a question that is very important to me and I was hoping you could offer me some advice. Right now, I am considering selling my Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (Nikon mount, for a D7100) to go ALL primes: 35mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.8G, 85mm 1.8G, 105mm 2.8G. The reasons for this switch are really two: the 70-200mm is heavy, and I LOVE primes! Anyway, I think I would be more happy with a bag full of the primes mentioned above, but I would be interested in your thoughts: should I sell it for all primes (35, 50, 85, 105) for wedding and portrait work? I will of course miss the extra reach with the 70-200 but if I had the 85 and 105 macro, the 70-200 would stay in my bag. When I am shooting weddings, I would only really need the extra focal length when the bride/groom is walking down the aisle. Thanks in advance!
Have you shot a wedding with all primes before? If you haven't, do so (preferably as an assistant first) before you make a decision. The thing about weddings is that those zoom lenses are tailor made for them. And the environment is such that you don't get a chance for a do-over. Maybe you could try shooting all primes during a rehearsal. I, personally, very rarely use zooms, but on the few occasions I've been conscripted to do weddings, I used zooms, and I was glad I did. I did revert to my primes when doing shots like signings and stills. Caveat: I don't know Nikon equipment, except for my 14-24 zoom (I didn't use it in any wedding). Continue Reading
Regarding: 35mm 1.8 50mm 1.8 24-70mm 2.8 I think you'll find the 35 and the 50 spend a lot of time in your bag, with the 24-70 on the camera almost all the time. The 24-70 and the 70-200 would be a great combination; buy a 5200 and attach the big lens to that and leave it on all the time. But if you insist on a prime, a 100/105 macro or a 135/150 would be good choices. BAK Continue Reading
I would advise against going 'all primes.' I love primes too, but in addition to the problem of lens changing in a fast paced environment they also have economic disadvantages from a business perspective. Time is money for anyone in business. Zooms offer the most versatility, that is, they allow you crop in camera saving post processing time in addition to not making you throw away cropped pixels. I retired last year, before that my basis kit was two Nikon FX DSLRs and 24-70/2.8 and a 70/200.2.8. With that combo I could cover almost anything. When I needed longer than 200mm I used a DX body to achieve 300mm on the zoom. Keep in mind that I live primes too, but unless you have primes that are deigned for digital you are likely to get better results with modern zooms, which often outperform prime lenses. When you are making gear decisions as a pro go for the greatest versatility with high IQ. Pro level zooms will deliver that. Continue Reading
Nikon 35mm 1.8g dx vs 50mm 1.8g bokeh?
Nikon 35mm 1.8g dx vs 50mm 1.8g bokeh? I know there are thousands of threads out there on this topic, comparison and whatnots. All the comparison I have seen on the web are like e.g. taking a photo of some object at say 3 meters with 50mm on a tripod then switching the lens with 35mm and then cropping the 35mm photo to match that of 50mm, obviously with this test the bokeh on 50mm is going to be better. What I want to know is e.g. when you take a shot with 50mm at 3 meters, in order to have the same coverage you have to take the shot at 2 meters with 35mm in order to have to same coverage without cropping the 35mm, then how would the bokeh between the two compare then. I have used dofmaster http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html to compare then two with the above scenerio and they both have the same depth of field. So is that really the case in real world or do 50mm 1.8 have a better shallow depth of field. I have a Nikon D5200 and I am planning on getting either a 35mm or 50mm but ...
masaad wrote: Nikon 35mm 1.8g dx vs 50mm 1.8g bokeh? Bokeh is a word used for describing QUALITY of blur. Not the amount of blur. I know there are thousands of threads out there on this topic, comparison and whatnots. All the comparison I have seen on the web are like e.g. taking a photo of some object at say 3 meters with 50mm on a tripod then switching the lens with 35mm and then cropping the 35mm photo to match that of 50mm, obviously with this test the bokeh on 50mm is going to be better. The bokeh (quality.. the smoothness of the blur) of the 50mm f1.8 AF-S is good, the bokeh of the 35mm f1.8 is very crappy. The amount of blur (quantity) depends on the size of the aperture. The 50mm f1.8, wide open, has an aperture of: 50 / 1.8 = 27.8mm The 35mm f1.8, wide open, has an aperture of: 35 / 1.8 = 19.4mm What I want to know is e.g. when you take a shot with 50mm at 3 meters, in order to have the same coverage you have to take the shot at 2 meters with 35mm in order to have to same ... Continue Reading
masaad wrote: I have a Nikon D5200 and I am planning on getting either a 35mm or 50mm but can't really seem to decide, I will mostly be using this for portraits, night photography, street photography... Portraits really demand a 50mm or really a bit longer. 35mm might be better for street, but not that much better. Get them both, if you want. Continue Reading
Have your own question?
- Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8 DX lens
- HB-46 Bayonet Lens Hood
- LC-52 Snap-On Front Lens Cap
- LF-1 Rear Lens Cap
- CL-0913 Soft Case
"No registration or "warranty" card is included or needed with a Nikon D-SLR or Coolpix camera. Keep your original, dated proof of purchase from the Authorized Nikon Inc. dealer in case warranty service is ever needed. These products do include either a mail-in form or a paper with a web link to our registration page:
It's advised to register your product with Nikon so that we can send you information about future updates or service issues that may arise.
Nikkor lenses come with a standard one year warranty and Nikon Inc. lenses sold by authorized Nikon Inc. dealers will have a Nikon Inc. Five Year Extension. To register for the five year extension, one copy of the included form must be mailed in as indicated. Keep the Customer copy of the form as well as the original proof of purchase (sales receipt)."
DPReview GearShop is an authorized Nikon dealer in the United States.