| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
 |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator.
 |
Nikon Z 35mm f/1.2 S Pros: sharpness (even in backlight), color and contrast rendering, resolution, three-dimensionality, medium format look, blurred (and bokeh), aberration treatment: very high resistance to flare, much more than its older brothers, field curvature correction, chromatic aberration correction, negligible (-1.11%) and linear barrel distortion, coma correction. AF excellent, its performance differs depending on the camera used, it gives its best (you will be amazed) with Z8 and Z9, but also with Z6 III. Nice lens hood. Uncompromising optical design construction. Tropicalization. Cons: for me they are not cons, but there are those who do not appreciate them and therefore it is right to point them out, as expected from an ultra-bright wide angle: fairly pronounced vignetting on large apertures (very easy to remove in post on raw) and tendency to cat's eye out of the center at full aperture (very similar to the Noct as a progression). Made in Thailand and totally useless and also quite ugly microfiber case. No fluorine coating on the outer lenses. Opinion: Ultra-bright wide-angles are my favorite lenses, although the good ones are rare, difficult to build, expensive and small behemoths for transport. If I had to describe in one word (language purists will excuse the Englishism) the images they manage to produce it would be "lush", a bit like adding a bit of those sidereal synths of the 80s to the natural sounds. It is not a pleasing lens like its older brothers 50mm and 85mm f1.2 or the Plena, many will not feel the need, but those who love this focal length will be bewitched. Among the 35mm f1.2 I've tried so far, especially (among the modern ones) the Sigma 35mm f/1.2 DG Art II and the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.2 LAB, it's the best and the most magical (but also two or three times more expensive): against the Sigma there is a more evident difference under all parameters; the Viltrox holds up better in some things and for many it can represent the right trade off: it has a faster and more precise AF (a difference that equalizes on Z8/Z9) and rounder bokeh balls at full aperture (but less gradual and less veiled blur, although very beautiful) thanks also to a more conventional and less ambitious lens scheme. The Nikon gives that extra quality that makes you go back to the files and the feeling that it has an exaggerated resolution and that it is also designed to tame the very muscular sensors in the near future. A very strong note of demerit is the lack of fluorine coating on the external lenses, a construction necessity or a way to force you to buy the Nikon Arcrest II filter that lives like a flower in all the official photos of the lens? Be aware of it. sent on 29 Aprile 2026 |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
