this is a lense I would buy if I had no other primes, but I have a 35, 50 and a 90 mm macro so no need for it, but I do want to point out that 40 mm macro is in the middle of everything I just describe. Thanks for the videos you make! Cheers from Mexico
I have this lens. Wonderful compact lens. However, waiting for Nikon to come out with a DX Z body with IBIS. Then it will be a wonderful combo for walkabout.
Nice review! I am now seriously considering this vs the 35mm 1.8G for a general purpose lens to carry! It's a hard decision. Ken Rockwell puts the 35mm 1.8g ahead of this as a general purpose lens even after admitting to its downsides (mainly distortion) but at the same time commends this one as an excellent lens that has almost no distortion. He adds that: "For general use, I prefer the 35mm f/1.8 DX, which gets more than close enough, costs $80 less, and adds over a stop of needed speed for even better low-light results." Also here in Finland that 80$ is 160$ (or 150e).
Thank you for your thoughts about this lens. It makes me even more excited to get it and try it out with my D500, or should I use it with my D7200 instead?
Here I was considering changing my D5600 for something better and more up to date but now I'm not so sure, but in order to invest in quality DX lenses, what happens if/ when my camera breaks down as they are no longer produced by Nikon apart from the D7500 at present.
The prices of DSLR bodies on the second hand market plummet, so there are gonna be a lot of great deals out there. Also with the FTZ adapter f-mount glass can still be used on newer bodies.
Hi nice post I’m a botanist and was inking of purchasing this lens as an alternative for my 105mm macro which I use on my dx body for wildflower photography in order to reduce weight of my hiking kit. Do you think I will have issues with my kit blocking light when shooting flowers? I guess I can use external LED or small flash off camera or bump up iso?.your thoughts? Thx isaac
It depends how close up you need to be. I consider this this lens to be the best for flower photography in the dx line up with it's creamy bokeh. I bought it as a package with the 10-20mm wide angle lens and both lenses have been great. The working distance is pretty close at 1:1 but otherwise you won't be disappointed. The raynox 250 on the 70-300 if you have it also works well for macro and gives you better working distance.
I thought i'm the only one still using Nikon DX camera ). But speaking seriously, I think that 35mm f1.8 is a bit better as a general purpose lens because it is wider being 52mm in FF équivalent. 40mm is 60mm in FF equivalent which is limiting as a street or landscape lens and is not telephoto enough for portraits. So I would gladly use it as a macro lens if i had it, but as a general purpose i prefere my 35mm f1.8 DX lens.
There are still a lot of DX shooters, believe me. I also had the 35mm F/1.8 dx lens and, especially considering the price tag, it is an excellently sharp lens. Unfortunately, the 35mm F/1.8 dx contains a lot of distortion, axial CA, bokeh nervous wide open, and no macro function. But if the lens works well for you then that's excellent.
There are of course better lenses, but this lens is ideal for me as a walkaround lens. Compactness, price and image quality are in an ideal mix. What is your favorite DX lens?
