Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 40mm f/2.8G Review

March 1, 2013 | Zoltan Arva-Toth | |

Your Comments

10 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 erik

Thank you for this review.

Can you show any sample of corner quality / sharpness / aberration / when this 40mm micro Nikkor is used for slide digitisation?
Quality in center is impressive, but what about corners / extreme corners?

8:23 am - Saturday, March 2, 2013

#2 Gareth O'Neill

If this lens is sharper than the 50 1.4G it will be a good cheap lens for DX users.

11:24 pm - Saturday, March 2, 2013

#3 Colin Nicholls

Nice review, seems a good price for those wanting to get into macro photography.

5:39 pm - Sunday, March 3, 2013

#4 Dell Deaton

Another thorough, helpful review (as usual here).

Spent a lot of time with this lens before ultimately choosing the Tokina AT-X Pro Macro 35 f/2.8 DX for this type of work. In addition to finding it an all-around more solidly built piece, it’s proven both more versatile when generally needed and better performing in close-up work I do in photographing wristwatches.

But a winner over the Nikkor lens you’ve reviewed here by only the thinnest of margins.

3:31 pm - Monday, March 4, 2013

#5 Zelda

You helped me a lot. Great review

8:01 am - Monday, April 29, 2013

#6 John Rodriguez

Thank you for the helpful review. I’m buying this tomorrow for silver photography especially the macro feature for the signature. I’m on a tight budget and this seems to be the cheapest solution for me.

1:33 pm - Wednesday, July 24, 2013

#7 Guy

Also worth pointing out that the distortion on this lens is almost non-existent, whereas on the slightly cheaper 35mm it’s pretty bad.

1:08 am - Monday, February 23, 2015

#8 Kim

The AF-S DX 35mm/1.8 (good as it is) do have loads of distortion, visible CA, ugly bokeh, and must be stopped down to at least f/4 to even resemble the center-sharpness of this 40mm/2.8 wide open. (The corners never gets as good)
All that for a meager 1-and-a-third stop more light? No way!
Anyone considering the DX 35mm/1.8 for general photography should go for the Micro DX 40mm/2.8 instead, and get much better general image quality and macro as a bonus! The ISO’s of modern cameras should make an aperture-stop or two irrelevant in lens decision.

8:33 am - Tuesday, June 7, 2016

#9 Stephen

Why the sample images are 60mm whereas this review is *supposed to be* for 40mm?

Am I missing something here?

1:42 pm - Wednesday, July 13, 2016

#10 Alexandros

I have the d3300 with the 18-55 kit lens so i have been searching the last 5 months for the best next buy, i was considering the 50 1,8g then the 35 1,8g , the 55-200 vr , the 18-140, but recently i found this lens and after a lot of analysis in the internet (also because of another good comparison and recommendation in this site) i decided to go for it.
Thank you for the review

2:35 pm - Friday, September 9, 2016

Entry Tags

review, test, lens, nikon, dslr, f2.8, portrait, aps-c, nikkor, macro, dx, close-up, 1:1, Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 40mm f2.8G, nikon 40mm, micro

Tracker Pixel for Entry