Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,964   Posts: 1,523,308   Online: 1237
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    799
    My fastest 35mm Nikkor is the 35/2 Nikkor O. It doesn't have the most modern coating but is nice and sharp. I wouldn't mind having a 35/1.4 for low light shooting. I could also use it on my Konica and Canon cameras.

  2. #12
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    I'd keep it. Why? On a APS-C Nikon digital SLR, it's approximately a 50/1.4; on an FX Nikon digital, the 35/1.4 supposedly sings.

    http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html

    It can even be hacked, via adapters, to work on micro 4/3 bodies. We're living on borrowed time with film bodies but not lenses. This is an extraordinary optic that will shine whatever it's stuck to, so hang on to it for now, for film, but also for the future.

  3. #13
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,067
    You may want to hunker down and shoot nothing but that lens for a week or two, and see if that changes your mind. If not, sell it while it has value. JMHO
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,542
    Quote Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
    The 35mm f/2 was the first Nikon lens I purchased and was my favorite lens until I replaced it with the 35mm f/1.4. I can understand adding a 35mm Nikkor AF-D f2 for the auto focus feature. However, I do not understand why you would get a Zeiss ZF 35mm f2 manual focus lens if the 35mm f/1.4 was meeting your needs.

    Since you have decided that you prefer the Zeiss f/2 to the Nikon f/1.4, list the 1.4 on eBay at a low starting bid and with no reserve.
    I have periodically gone through bouts of lens buying. I got the AF-D lens shortly after the AIS because I had read various test reports and reviews concluding the much cheaper AF-D was actually slightly sharper and more contrasty/less prone to flare at smaller apertures. I've never even owned an AF body. I never observed any difference in performance between the two lenses myself, but once I had the AF-D I just kept using it.

    More recently I had the chance to try a few ZFs. I had no expectations either way, but it turned out to be a gem. I do find it to be a bit sharper around the edges/corners in 8x10" prints. So sensibly or not, I bought it, and it is one of my favourites.

    All this to say, yeah in the end it never really made much sense for me to not use the AIS lens, and to keep buying more lenses. But occasionally I can't help myself even though I know better. As John Sexton says about photographers, "we like stuff".

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,913
    If you barely used it in 10 years+, what are the chances of you using it again? If you treasure the lens for emotional reasons, then I understand and we all have an item or two like that, but for practical purposes, I'd imagine it'd be sitting for the next 10 years used even less. Personally, I'd sell it and buy something else that I'd actually use and enjoy.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,542
    I have to admit I'm starting to lean in that direction.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin