Super image quality - better for me than Sigma!

As it is now, the good piece - some test shots - no, not from the board, but out in the field - are made, as always with the D800. This already give a fairly good picture of the quality of the lens.

Construction:
The lens is light, but not cheap. The build quality is roughly comparable to that of the 3.5-4.5 / 24-85VR - not outstanding, but quite neat. Lovers heavy metal tubes are likely to have a hard time accepting. The supplied lens hood, which is aufbajonettiert as usual, is running a little thicker than we had last seen her Nikon at this price level, which is gratifying. The camera mount is a bit tight. Personally, I'm not thrilled about '58 - as usual plastic - thread, because I have no filter of this size, however, many in the earlier Nikon widespread 62er size. In the well-equipped with 58 mm threaded 1.4 / 50G to 62er's resolutions can be adapted by means of adapter ring and the Streulichblende goes about it! The works in this 35er unfortunately not so that I now still have to buy some 58 mm filter in addition. However, this is not a criticism of the lens, but rather an individual problem.

Function:
The AF is not outspoken Renner, but not slow, my impression is definitely faster than the 1.4 / 50G. From my side there is nothing to criticize it. It also applies to the point quickly exactly, whether in the near or far area. The nearest focusing distance is 25cm and this is already pretty close, so that leaves the game with the sharp and blurred close distance at large aperture lens with this play admirably. The distance ring is doing what he should.

Picture performance:
What is, already hinted already at the first photos with this lens that appeared on the network, confirmed in his own recordings: The image overall performance can be described only as excellent. The sharpness is very good even at full aperture, slightly dimmed the lens turns the entire image field as a razor-sharp. The maximum aperture has a - albeit only slightly - reduced contrast. The output aperture 1.8 is fully useful in any case! That's what we wanted from this lens! The colors are rich and pleasant, like that of most newer Nikkor lenses, rather slightly warm from the trend. Even at close range, the sharpness is surprisingly high; Fade to increase sharpness at close range is not absolutely necessary. The bokeh is very nice, but little of the Traumbokeh Sigma 1.4 / 35 below. In the typical, extreme local / remote combination (sharp detail in about 50 cm distance, in the background of infinity, f 1.8) affects the image background pronounced "creamy"; together with advancing distances (Ex .: focus on object in 2 m distance, background distance of 10 m, f 1.8) affects the background clearly restless; that's my opinion a typical effect of the short focal length, less the lens design. I had previously made my close-ups involving a blurred landscape background with the AF-S 2.8 / 17-35D. This otherwise very good imaging lens relative to the AF-S is superior to 1,8 / 35 FX from the overall sharpness (edge ​​sharpness higher and more uniform sharpness towards the edges) and the bokeh visible. CA, vignetting and distortion, I could not discover, however, have the appropriate corrections to the camera turned on. For RAW images, it must then judge the Bearbeitunssoftware. The lack of Naanokristallvergütung (the "N" in any case lacking in the lens name) does not adopt a negative impact; it is probably also the case of simpler and wenigerlinsigen lens structures is not absolutely necessary. Images with contrast and sidelight act quite crispy and not obscured.

Conclusion:
A more than worthy successor to the old AF 2/35, which was located since 1988 in my camera bag and was given 2 years ago as no longer sufficiently powerful. The image performance is so good that I can get over the lighter construction of new and the slightly scratchy bayonet contrast and can give *****.

Postscript:
Since there are only few meaningful reviews, I rushed me. If later noticed me something, this information will be supplied naturally. Additional Stand Sept. 2014: There is nothing in principle nachzutragen. The lens has proven to be a pleasant companion with a great image quality and beautiful bokeh as defined above,. Whenever it comes to the bokeh (but even if I want to take a slight combination), it is the more versatile and otherwise quite good imaging AF-S 2.8 / 17-35D preferred.

This or Sigma?
And now deliver an opinion on the exciting question: "1.4 / 35 take this Nikon 1.8 / 35FX or the highly acclaimed Sigma?" This I can answer, of course, only from my point of view. The price plays a minor role only because the Sigma currently only eta 220 is expensive and I have to spendieren for about 80 filter my Nikon, which at the Sigma would not have been necessary, therefore, the difference is only 140 real for me. No, for me to play the following reasons, the main role:
1) As I said earlier, already showed the first recordings with the new Nikkor that circulated in the network (eg Mansurovs / photography life) typical for the newer Nikkor lenses "juicy", differentiated and harmonious colors, with what in my recordings the lens has confirmed. In contrast to show all the photos that have been made with the Sigma - and I have appointed seen 100 of them - the sigma typical cool, economical and more muted colors. Since I had 5 Sigma lenses, I can say that has probably not changed all that much at the Sigma-color trend and I find the color results simply less attractive than the Nikon.
2.) For Sigma lenses I am a "once bitten": In my life I had photo 5 Sigma, which unfortunately all did not keep that which Sigma and the testers had promised, so that I have them all abolished in the end.
3.) The direction of rotation of the focus of the Sigma lenses for Nikon photographers 'wrong' around, about, in contrast to Tamron lenses.
4.) The Sigma 35er weighs more than twice the Nikon lens, approximately 350g more! I pay attention to the weight of my camera bag. So I did as the 2.8 / 90 VC Macro of Tamron (s my **** -. Review there) bought instead of 200g heavier 2.8 / 105 VR Micro Nikon, the weight saving has played a significant role. Whether I carry around about 1/2 kilo more or less with me, I do something out!
5.) Sigma has obvious problems with the Nikon camera software. This was already evident in the introduction of the Nikon D5300. Sigma lenses had to be returned and adjusted, which in older well but no longer is possible. With the appearance of the Nikon Df showed that Sigma lenses do not work properly with this camera. This raises the question: What will bring the future incompatibilities appearing Nikon-housing for use with Sigma lenses with them?
6.) If we follow reviews and discussions on the net, so it can be concluded that it is not properly cooperate in the STYLE line of Sigma 20-30% of the delivered lenses with the cameras used, so that conversions, repairs or adjustments are necessary but probably not in all cases lead to the goal. The Sigma-Servivce recommended in these cases, but the "Dock" to create - at his own expense of course - and then take over their work. I just read a report of a photographer who had a Sigma acquired 2.8 / 120-300 OS and has spent "a whole day" using the Sigma-dock with the optimization of the focus. For this I have no desire! I expect that a delivered lens works. And in just over 30 Nikkor lenses that I have or had, which has always been the case.

The owners of a functioning and good imaging Sigma 35s I congratulate; they have a first-class lens in use. However, my Nikon is discussed here rather, not only because I have no desire to be a technical "flying blind" with the Sigma, but because I also feel that 1,8er Nikon in terms of performance as equivalent.

PS: There are now at photography Life also a comparison of the MTF curves between the Sigma 1.4 / 35 and the Nikon 1.8 / 35FX, after which the Nikon can compete in the sharpness on the whole with the Sigma and at maximum aperture ( Sigma 1.4, Nikon 1.8) even in the middle still a tiny "liquor" is better. This confirms fully my personal impression of sharpness.

PPS: For completeness, it is noted that, according to Sigma, the incompatibility of which 1.4 / 35 with the Nikon Df was resolved by a software update of the lens (see also under "Comments").