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.

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!

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

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.

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

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 👌

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

I use Viltrox 75 F/1.2 on mt Z8

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

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.

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

is viltrox on the right? this bokeh looks weird 😮

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

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...

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

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