Viltrox 35 1.8 VS Nikon 35 1.8 - Clear Difference?

Which side by side comparison is which lens?

[@pr4y]

I have the viltrox Z 24 1.8 costing brand new 1/4 of the Nikkor Z one and don't think it is 1/4 the quality of the 1.8S Paired with my power lens 50 1.2S Z on my main body. I'm happy and maybe thinking of the Viltrox 85 1.8 as well

[@russandloz]

@@pr4y yeap. All lenses are good now. It’s just how some deal with difficult situations

[@ArsenijeRadenovic]

Nice review, I am thinking about getting 35 and 85 from Viltrox soon as I have had a chance of using it on the dance floor on my last wedding. And I was more impressed with that 85mm to be honest. Such a gorgeous lens. I'd rather have 35 and 85 combo for this time of the wedding season, than just having one of those two lenses (budged is restricting me). I am sure that Nikons are better, but as you shown it is not really that much of a difference. Anyhow our clients can't tell those differences and I like to remind myself that. We obsess too much as photographers, normal people can't tell that stuff apart. Cheers!

[@russandloz]

Very true. You see Nikon have released a 35mm 1.4 non S. seems expensive

[@ArsenijeRadenovic]

@@russandloz yes I also saw that, and honestly it looks very underwhelming. I'd rather buy F mount 1.4 it has such a nice character to it. For my use I think I will go for Viltrox combo for now.

[@ArsenijeRadenovic]

Update for Viltrox: Be sure to test the 35mm 1.8 before coming home with it. Was utterly disappointed when I realised that lens is almost impossible to mount and take off. It must be serial problem because mount is not well machined at all. Now I have to return the lens.

[@stefan_becker]

Now which is which at 5:39? 😅If you ask me the left lens has a much better bokeh! The right one produces ugly rings in the upper right corner.

[@warrickcoe5576]

I bought the viltrox 85 1.8, it's a great lens for the price. I only really do family portraits and I just can't justify the price difference to get the Nikon 85 1.8. I am glad that third party companies are stepping up to provide budget primes that are reasonable price and quality. I shoot mostly macro and product photography so I have the 105 and the 24-70 for events, but to be able to get a budget portrait and my next purchase will be the 20mm 2.8 viltrox for those focal ranges that I don't often shoot.

[@TylerThomas]

You guys have a great candor. I like hearing a real conversation rather than being preached at. I still think the sharpness tests should start at the smallest aperture and go towards 1.8 rather than starting at 1.8

[@russandloz]

Thanks Tyler. I like to use lenses wide open so it makes sense for me 😊

[@avnerbenzvi8757]

I use Viltrox 75 F/1.2 on mt Z8

[@russandloz]

How do you find it? Especially as its a dx lens?

[@avnerbenzvi8757]

fantastic (Zfc and Z8) @@russandloz

[@Tmk969]

Interesting review, Nikon 35mm 1.8 z is one of the softest Z lesnes, even my 28-75 z looks same or better wide open, old nikon f sigma art is sharper. But it's sharpness is ok for use, but it is the minimum of sharpness what i would use, so if Viltrox is worse, i think it's not acceptable anymore.

[@russandloz]

Good point, but I've used it for casual street and travel and find the image quality good enough and sharp enough. But sure, they are both in-superior really

[@AimingAtYou]

Is that true - that the 28-75 is as good? I am thinking of getting it, but not sure.... Would use it for a few weddings. . .

[@Tmk969]

@@AimingAtYouwide open on 28mm and 75mm corners may be a little softer, but center and mid shrpness is very good. 75mm is softest.

[@russandloz]

@@AimingAtYou For me I often need a 24 which can make a difference. But my wide prime is 28 1.4 so it is good most the time

[@tor2919]

Really? My 35S is sharper than the 24-70/4S which is a great lens. The 35 is the most underrated Z lens I think partly due to some harsh KZbin vids that I never understood and I own all the 1.8S primes

[@jtes1442]

The Nikon is a better lens, no doubt about it. These days, most lenses are sharp. The Viltrox lens is undoubtedly a good value, but the Nikon 35 1.8 S is a superior product as it has better CA performance, sharpness (if it's a big deal to you), and rendering. One can always pick up a used copy of the Nikon 35 1.8 S reasonably priced.

[@russandloz]

Nikon is technically the better lens but could you tell the difference in the video side by side?

[@on_wheels_80]

@@russandloz Only in terms of bokeh. Both are bad, the right one is downright ugly.

[@WhoIsSerafin]

I have to tell you from this video the viltrox surprisingly looked better in every way from bokeh to rendering.

[@russandloz]

It’s close. The Nikon does better with more difficult situations. Are you considering one?

[@WhoIsSerafin]

@@russandloz I'm a hypocrite I just recently got the Nikon version.

[@russandloz]

@@WhoIsSerafin How do you find it?

[@pete1927]

Another class discussion chaps, not in the market for this prime if I was your views in this chat would certainly be a main consideration. I just wish Nikon gave you one each to test and then comeback with a chat. You certainly discuss what potential buyers are thinking.

[@russandloz]

@@pete1927 we did nearly get a deal to review lenses from them but they stopped responding. Maybe we are too honest and they prefer the Nikon fan boys all is golden view 🤷‍♂️

[@pete1927]

@@russandloz same has Hudson Henry a great reviewer trainer and Nikon user but seems to be shunned. He does loads of Nikon output but they don’t seem to be interested in… perhaps you should be saying its insane very 2 seconds Loz 😂

[@noephoto85]

Where is the answer, of the question: wich is which? I'm confused. I'will buy the right one and dont know which it is...

[@russandloz]

Do you see a difference? The right hand one is Viltrox

[@noephoto85]

@@russandlozyeah in Kontrast and in bokeh. With right your mean the right hand in the video, or the right side of my screen? :)

[@russandloz]

@@noephoto85 Rogut hand of your screen is the viltrox.

[@TA-bi8sp]

@@russandlozhi sorry; what kind of color profile you use? for the sooc video

[@russandloz]

@@TA-bi8sp Standard in camera profile

[@silencershooter]

i own both of them for wedding.. nikon 35 1.8s make your output less headchace than viltrox..

[@russandloz]

Less lens shortcomings to deal with?

[@warthog123]

Have the z 40mm f/2. Much better and usable walk around lens. And tack sharp too.

[@russandloz]

I did like the look of it. But prefer the 35 focal length. 40 is closer to the 50 I already have

[@stefan_becker]

The 40mm f2 is in my opinion "just sharp enough" for a 24mp sensor. No more, no less.

[@apocryphal_man]

Not even.

[@tor2919]

I own both the 35S and 40. I love the 40 as a walk around but it’s not as sharp or as nice as the 35S. Not as sharp and not as good focus fall off. The 35S is easily the most underrated Nikon lens.

[@photo2000]

For anyone looking for a 35mm... The Tamron 35mm 1.8VC is a GUN!! Not sure they are making them anymore, think they only do the 1.4, but if you ever find the 1.8, don't hesitate it is outstanding... and can focus even closer than 23cm... I can nearly touch subject with lens hood it can get so close. It is probably my favorite lens 👌

[@fangli]

How the speed of the Autofocus?

[@photo2000]

@@fangli it's not sluggish, but not the fastest either. I was photographing an impromptu fashion parade the other day with people walking briskly towards me, and it was struggling to keep up with their pace. But that's not really what it was designed for. I use it for events all the time and it can grab quick moments in low light. If I had to choose one lens above all other to shoot an event or portrait session, this is the one that I'm using.

[@fangli]

@@photo2000 the tamron 35mm USED price almost the same with new 40mm f.2 Nikon z, and i bit confuse to choose both of them,

[@photo2000]

@@fangli it depends what you are shooting, and if you need the angle of view the 35mm provides.

[@fangli]

@@photo2000 mainly i shoot event birthday wedding etc, need more wider than 50mm

[@paulhopkins1905]

I honestly couldn't see any difference in sharpness, in fact I thought the Viltrox had the edge

[@russandloz]

They are both sharp, its only in cropping you might see differences

[@kasiawojtowicz906]

is viltrox on the right? this bokeh looks weird 😮

[@BodhiMalibu]

You sound sleepy during the actual testing of the lens but overall great video

[@russandloz]

It’s my natural voice unfortunately lol. It’s hard narrating and presenting but getting better

[@PeterWigenBjarnoe]

I have a Viltrox, an 85/f1.8, and I chose it over Nikon's 85/f1.8, as I think it has better bokeh. Nikon's is probably sharper, but only at 200% magnification, and I have no use for that. But as for the 35/f1.8, I chose the Nikon's, not because it is sharper (which is only seen at high magnifications), but because of the focus speed, distortion and focus close limit. I have just bought the Viltrox 16/f1.8, which has just been released for the Nikon Z mount, and I look forward to receiving it in approx. 6 days. I have completely moved away from zoom lenses, partly because of the larger aperture and because I get better pictures, since I don't have the zoom function to decide on. You could say the smaller toolbox has given me greater opportunities to compose the image. But I guess it's just me who feels that way.

[@russandloz]

I feel there is room for a premium quality 35mm lens for z mount. Who knows where the 1.2 is...

[@PeterWigenBjarnoe]

@@russandloz I partly agree, but for my use Nikon's 1.8s and some Viltrox premium are enough. For me, an interesting image is not necessarily one that is technically perfect. For me, there is a big difference between whether a picture is beautiful or interesting and exciting to look at. But there are probably many fine art photographers who disagree with me, and of course they should be allowed to do so. There are many old photographs that are a technical disaster, yet extremely interesting to look at. And I try to make interesting and exciting pictures that challenge and entertain the viewer.

[@n1ngnuo]

I would still buy the Nikon and pay more, I don’t trust Viltrox to work well 10 years from now. I have G-lenses from 2006 and they still work perfectly on my Zfc with the FTZ adapter. I also wonder Viltrox’s quality controll, are all lenses reliably as good as your copy? Not sure.

[@russandloz]

Only time will tell. But the feel and build of the lens is very good.

[@photographydiscourse1185]

The 50mm 1.8 S and the 35mm 1.8 S both came out at the same time - at the launch of the Z mount. The 50mm 1.8 S is an astounding lens that is widely known to punch way above its weight class - it competes head to head with lenses that are over $2000 and it is around $600. That said, the 35mm 1.8 S, although not quite up to the 50mm 1.8 S standard, is no slouch itself. If the 50mm is a 5 star lens then the 35mm 1.8 S is easily a 4 star if not 4.5. It is a little clinical but you can do whatever you want with it in post. It is great for video as well. In general, the 35mm 1.8 S is a work horse lens and great for event photographers - it has excellent build quality and IQ - you cant go wrong with this lens. -PD

[@tor2919]

Wow actually very big difference in colour and contrast thought - the Nikon is much nicer. Very clear to me even through a KZbin video watching on a phone screen

[@ArsenijeRadenovic]

Hey I used viltrox 35mm and 85mm last Sunday on the dance floor (grabbed them from my friend at the wedding) and I was amazed how fast and good these lenses were.