PDA

View Full Version : Lens Advice



RichNY
09-12-2007, 12:17 AM
I'm planning out what my lens configuration should be with the D3 and D300- have both on order but not sure which I'll end up keeping for a bit.

Can someone please tell me if this is the best glass to go with:
D300- 12-24 f/4
17-55 f/2.8 (I loose IS switching from Canon)
70-200 f/2.8 VR
80-400 VR f/4.5-5.6 (to take place of Canon 100-400)
200-400 is out of the price range right now
I currently have an 85 f/1.8. What's the best Nikon portrait prime?

D3- 14-24 f/2.8
24-70 f/2.8 VR
70-200 f/2.8 VR
80-400 VR f/4.5-5-6 (to take the place of the Canon 100-400)
Best portrait prime?

Are these the right choices to make for the Nikon line?

fionndruinne
09-12-2007, 12:28 AM
There's so much money in what's been mentioned here, I think I'm plain traumatized. Thanks, Rich.:mad:

;)

RichNY
09-12-2007, 12:44 AM
There's so much money in what's been mentioned here, I think I'm plain traumatized. Thanks, Rich.:mad:

;)

Yeah, but if Nikon turns out to be the system that will best meet my needs replacing either one or both Canon's I'll be getting back enough money to offset most of the cost. Any way you slice it, this isn't a cheap hobby.

Rooz
09-12-2007, 01:44 AM
although i don;t quite understand why you would switch with your great kit...i'll comment on the lens' i have either own or have used first hand.

D300- 12-24 f/4
i have never used the nikkor wide angle. i'm comfortable with the sigma or tokina choices. there is of course the new f2.8 WA to consider.

17-55 f/2.8 (I loose IS switching from Canon)
this is a heavy lens. i love it optically but its a big mutha. i prefer the canon version in all honesty.

70-200 f/2.8 VR
love it. absolutely outstanding.

80-400 VR f/4.5-5.6 (to take place of Canon 100-400)
i've only used this lens a few times and actually alongside the 100-400IS. i was seriously going to get this lens but decided against it. its similar IQ wise to the C 100-400 and without the push/pull zoom rubbish that i detest. my main gripe with the lens is that it's freakin' slow on AF and i get better results from my 70-200VR with 1.7x TC.

What's the best Nikon portrait prime?
the 85mm f1.4 is incredible. the bokeh is to die for. i get petrified every time i touch a d200 or this lens cos my wallet can;t take another beating but i want it sooooo much. it's said to have some CA issues but i've never noticed in real life shots. of course the 50mm is a great option aswell; the 1.4 version is nicer and i regret not investing in that over the 1.8.

RichNY
09-12-2007, 02:23 AM
although i don;t quite understand why you would switch with your great kit...i'll comment on the lens' i have either own or have used first hand.

Thanks for your feedback. I love my glass, I hate my cameras. For what I was shooting when I bought the Canon's it was the right choice for fast action ISO 1600.

Now that I'm not shooting that any more, and the Nikon's supposedely have improved with high ISO, I'd really like to shoot with a camera I enjoy. The 1D IIN has a horrible user interface with multiple buttons and dials to turn; the 30D has slow autofocus and just isn't that comfortable for me to shoot with. I also absolutely hate the Canon flash.

When I've shot with a Nikon D200 it was much more enjoyable experience- shooting was fun. Either brand will have the quality and features that I need. Considering near equal image quality, it really comes down to which I enjoy shooting and I know it isn't Canon. I only shoot when I have an event to go to where I want to capture images. I never pick up my camera and go shooting because I just enjoy the experience. That to me is a reason to switch.

coldrain
09-12-2007, 03:46 AM
400 x 1.6 = 640mm
400 x 1.5 = 600mm
400 x 1.3 = 520mm
400 x 1 = 400mm

I do not know what you use your 100-400mm lens for. But do realize that you will lose quite some reach. If you actually use the reach of it, a 80-400 in a D3 will not give you what you need.
The downside of the 100-400 is the push/pull zoom... some like it, others dislike it. But it has two plus points on the Nikon 80-400, the AF speed and the resolution and contrast at 400mm.

If 400mm is enough for you anyway, the Sigma 80-400 OS will offer better performance at 400mm than the Nikon. Handling is another matter.

So... if you do need the 500-600mm, you will have to look at something else. At what, I have no idea. Maybe just not at a full frame body.

If you DON'T need the 500-600mm, then you might just do with a "consumer" 70-300 VR for a fraction of the price if you would choose a D300. Since 300 x 1.5 = 450mm.

tcadwall
09-12-2007, 08:39 AM
Rich,

Wow, that is a big decision. I agree with you on the handling. I wish I was making enough money with my gear to order the D300. It gives a LOT for the money... To me it seems like just an INCREDIBLE deal.

I really don't have the experience with the high end glass to be able to comment, except that I will add either the 85mm or the Tamron 90mm. I have heard very good things about the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 di Macro - this lens is also good FX and DX

Obviously you already know the focal length that you would want for the portraits. on the D300 a fixed 85 or 90 would be in the longish-but-still-portrait range - great for headshots, puts you at a further location for body shots. On the D3 this would be at the shorter end of portrait range - Still placing you at a pretty close proximity to your subjects for head shots, but not requiring a long distance for figure shots. For the D300 a combination of this and a 50mm (either 1.8 or 1.4 take tremendous shots) would probably cover all your portrait needs. On the D3 you might want to add something a bit longer as well.

RichNY
09-12-2007, 04:03 PM
While I have a D3 and D300 on order I haven't made any decision yet as to what I am going to be doing. Until these cameras are released and reviewed everything is speculative. I'm just gathering information now so that if Nikon does turn out to be the path that best suits my needs I'll have the research out of the way.

Coldy- I was finding myself using the 400mm on the 30D when going to the zoo. I also used it when taking pictures of my nephew running track. It's great when I use it but I've found myself using it less than I anticipated. I could probably hold off on a 100-400 replacement if I used a 1.7x TC without too much problem although the extra 130mm will be missed.

TNB
09-12-2007, 09:19 PM
...I'd really like to shoot with a camera I enjoy. The 1D IIN has a horrible user interface with multiple buttons and dials to turn; the 30D has slow autofocus and just isn't that comfortable for me to shoot with. I also absolutely hate the Canon flash.

When I've shot with a Nikon D200 it was much more enjoyable experience- shooting was fun . . . I never pick up my camera and go shooting because I just enjoy the experience. That to me is a reason to switch.
Based on your post, I just sort of wanted to reiterate what I have mentioned in the past to others and to others who may be new and reading this thread...

Try each camera body and decide which body feels best for "you" as the individual using the camera, not what someone else picks for you since they are not the one who will be using it;
Don't pick up a D200 (or possibly the soon to be released D300) unless you are really considering the purchase of a D200 (or the D300) since it may just draw you into its "force"; and
No matter which camera body "you" choose, have fun and enjoy yourself with your own decision.

Rooz
09-12-2007, 09:31 PM
While I have a D3 and D300 on order I haven't made any decision yet as to what I am going to be doing. Until these cameras are released and reviewed everything is speculative. I'm just gathering information now so that if Nikon does turn out to be the path that best suits my needs I'll have the research out of the way.

Coldy- I was finding myself using the 400mm on the 30D when going to the zoo. I also used it when taking pictures of my nephew running track. It's great when I use it but I've found myself using it less than I anticipated. I could probably hold off on a 100-400 replacement if I used a 1.7x TC without too much problem although the extra 130mm will be missed.

not sure exactly what you shoot, as tempting as the 400 range is, i would recommend against the 80-400mm for the reasons i explained above unless you're shooting in excellent light in which case it works great, (still a bit slow though).

i sometimes miss the range too but these days you can always crop back with such great clarity it's not so much of an issue. besides the 200VR plus 1.7xTC is 340mm anyway. its not too far off.

fionndruinne
09-12-2007, 11:02 PM
I never pick up my camera and go shooting because I just enjoy the experience. That to me is a reason to switch.

Amen to that. I don't foresee, given the proven strengths of the D200 and the way Nikon is sticking with that, how the D300 could be aught but great. Better than a 30D shouldn't be too hard to accomplish anyway.:rolleyes: The 1D vs. D3, though, who knows how Nikon's very first full frame will handle?

Rooz
09-12-2007, 11:15 PM
The 1D vs. D3, though, who knows how Nikon's very first full frame will handle?

i bet you a sigma lens cap it'll handle perfectly. :D

XaiLo
09-12-2007, 11:54 PM
Wouldn't that be just a 90mm difference on the D300 (100-400mm vs 200mm plus 1.7TC? Anyway Rich I'm a found believer in happiness and forking over good dollars to be unsatisfied just does not qualify as being happy. Some people have a hard time understanding why someone would fork over 300K for an LP640. Go figure but at the end of the day some things just have to be experienced to be appreciated. With that said without the experience it's basically viewed as a over priced clunker.

Any camera can take pictures but not every camera can make it a joyful experience. I still like my S3 but basically now it only goes where I don't want to take my Nikon. Or when the kid or wife wants to take some pics. Thank goodness my happiness is not predicated on the understanding of others.

I'm finding the new 14-24mm and 24-70mm to be quite appealing if they truely rival primes they'll be worth the investment either way I go and with the 70-200mm there's no overlap the 50mm 1.4/105micro/200mm/600mm will round out my kit. I'm into sharpness what can I say. my2cents.

fionndruinne
09-12-2007, 11:58 PM
i bet you a sigma lens cap it'll handle perfectly.

If ya can even pick it up. Still, that sounds like a solid bet; make it a Nikon lens cap. C'mon, you can afford it. :p

cwphoto
09-13-2007, 12:39 AM
Here's what I reckon you should do:
D3
D300
14-24/2.8
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 VR
85/1.4
SB800
TC14E

Forget the 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR and go straight for a 300/2.8 VR!

The 85/1.4 has old AF too - but still a cracking lens from what I hear.

VTEC_EATER
09-13-2007, 07:14 AM
So... if you do need the 500-600mm, you will have to look at something else. At what, I have no idea. Maybe just not at a full frame body.



I suppose if you want the extra range, you can always just buy a 1.4x teleconverter and up your ISO by a stop. The D3 sounds like it is a "noise free" camera up to ISO 6400, and you have all the way up to ISO 25600, so losing a stop of light to get the extra reach doesn't sound like a problem for the D3.

swgod98
09-13-2007, 11:25 AM
Rich <- is

Damn, man! I remember when you first bought your 20D (or was it a 30D?). Doesn't matter. You upgraded to a 1D within a year (hell, a few months)! And the lenses you've been buying are not cheap!

Since price doesn't seem to be an issue for you at all, then a switch is definitely a good idea (since you're unhappy).

Everyone's had some good advice, so I really don'y have anything to add other than if the decision is made, I hope you'll be happy. Because money is still money.

You can always paypal a donation to my D300 fund :D

TNB
09-13-2007, 04:20 PM
For those of you that recommend the 1.4x TC over the 1.7x TC, why? I am just wondering since NikonUSA's website specifically claims that the 1.7x TC...

Supports the use of Nikon Vibration Reduction (VR) function
yet, that is not mentioned on NikonUSA's website regarding the 1.4x TC. Myself, that is one reason I purchased the 1.7x TC over the 1.4x TC.

1.4x TC
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2129

1.7x TC
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=2151

coldrain
09-13-2007, 04:25 PM
The VR is totally independant of a TC. In fact, it is independant of the camera.
The VR stabilizes the image, and the TC crops that already stabilized image.

So... it makes no difference what TC you use, whether it is from Nikon, or from Soligor, or from Tamron, or from Kenko, in repect to the functionality of the VR.

This is entirely different in cameras with in-body IS, though, like Pentax, Olympus and Sony DSLRs. There the TC will give a big problem to the IS, because the IS needs to know what focal length is being used. And with a TC the reported focal lenght and the actual focal length will be quite different.

TNB
09-13-2007, 04:29 PM
The VR is totally independant of a TC. In fact, it is independant of the camera.
The VR stabilizes the image, and the TC crops that already stabilized image.

So... it makes no difference what TC you use, whether it is from Nikon, or from Soligor, or from Tamron, or from Kenko, in repect to the functionality of the VR.

This is entirely different in cameras with in-body IS, though, like Pentax, Olympus and Sony DSLRs. There the TC will give a big problem to the IS, because the IS needs to know what focal length is being used. And with a TC the reported focal lenght and the actual focal length will be quite different.
So then WHY then would NikonUSA specifically state that the 1.7x supports the use of the VR function at all if it makes no difference? Perhaps, you should point that out to NikonUSA.

coldrain
09-13-2007, 04:35 PM
So then WHY then would NikonUSA specifically state that the 1.7x supports the use of the VR function at all if it makes no difference? Perhaps, you should point that out to NikonUSA.
How can I know why NikonUSA points that out that way?
If you are interested in that, I suggest you write them an email.

In the mean time, put any 1.4x TC cheapo from for instance Tamron or Kenko between your 70-200 VR and camera body, and see for yourself that VR still works.

The reason VR has to work independantly is because of the speed that is needed to correct the movement. You have to move at the same time you detect the movement. And that is impossible when you need to first communicate to the body and do what not. The VR/IS servo systems are quite simple and very fast.
The VR system of the lens will have no knowledge of a TC being mounted, the camera may know that with certain TC's (not with all).

TNB
09-13-2007, 04:47 PM
How can I know why NikonUSA points that out that way?
If you are interested in that, I suggest you write them an email.

In the mean time, put any 1.4x TC cheapo from for instance Tamron or Kenko between your 70-200 VR and camera body, and see for yourself that VR still works.

Why not just check Nikon's website?


Compatibility with a teleconverter depends on the lens being used and not the camera. If the lens is compatible with a converter it can be used on any Nikon digital SLR.

More information can also be found on the following page...

http://support.nikontech.com/cgi-bin/nikonusa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=13929&p_created=1142887152&p_sid=8vNYZDLi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=238&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9NjYmcF9wcm9kcz0wJnBfY2F0cz0wJnBfcHY9JnB fY3Y9JnBfc2VhcmNoX3R5cGU9YW5zd2Vycy5zZWFyY2hfbmwmc F9wYWdlPTEmcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD10ZWxlY29udmVydGVycyB 2cg**&p_li=&p_topview=1

For example:


Are there some lenses that can't be used with a teleconverter?

Yes, not all lenses can be used with a teleconverter. In general wide angle lenses or wide angle zoom lenses cannot be used. Also, lenses with relatively slow maximum apertures (slower than f2.8) cannot be used with teleconverters.

The following common lenses cannot be used with an autofocus teleconverter:

17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX
18-55 f3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX
18-70 f3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S VR DX
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX
70-300 f4-5.6D ED AF
70-300 f4-5.6G AF
24-120 f3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR
80-400 f4.5-5.6D ED AF VR

18-135 f3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX

Some newer lenses can be used with older Nikon manual focus teleconverters with limited compatibility. With a manual teleconverter there would be no autofocus operation, the camera's internal exposure meter would not be active and only "Manual" exposure mode could be used. Further, there may be vignetting (darkened corners of the photo) in some photos or other image defects.

For complete lens/teleconverter compatibility please view these PDF files:

Manual Focus Lenses Specifications

AF Nikkor Lenses Specifications

The 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF supports the TC-201 and the TC-14A (occasional vignetting) & TC-14B (AF not possible).
The 70-200mm f2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR supports the TC-14EII, TC-17E II, TC-20EII
Compatibility with a teleconverter depends on the lens being used and not the camera. If the lens is compatible with a converter it can be used on any Nikon digital SLR.

coldrain
09-13-2007, 04:57 PM
Their website does not offer the information that you are unclear about.

So, since you are unclear about it, I suggested you write them an email, since you wanted me to ask Nikon something weird.

TC's do not inhibit in-lens VR/IS. Ask any pro with VR/IS tele's and with 1.4x/1.7x2.0x TCs in their bag. Or try to think about the issues involved.

TNB
09-13-2007, 05:11 PM
Actually, my original question was basically why recommend a 1.4x TC over a 1.7x TC if a longer range is desired. The VR point is secondary (and since you appear to know so much about ALL cameras, including Nikon, I figured why not ask you).

However, the compatibility charts do show some differences between the teleconverters when used with certain lenses. The charts also show that some VR lenses are not compatibile as well. And of course, there are auto-focusing issues depending on the specific teleconverter used. It's also my understanding that Canon's IS doesn't work quite the same way as Nikon's VR system, so it wouldn't suprise me if there were differences between the two systems as well.

I really don't care if the general description on NikonUSA's website was due to the fact that the 1.7x TC came out after both the 1.4x TC or 2.0x TC (which I could have purchased for $60 used at Samy's) were released or is just a marketing ploy since I've already purchased the 1.7x TC. Myself, I just thought the extra .2x might be worth it, i.e. 1.7x - 1.5 = .2, and since I heard bad things about the 2.0x, I passed on it even at $60. To this date, the only lens that I have used with the 1.7x TC that I own is the 70-200 F/2.8 VR.

coldrain
09-13-2007, 05:15 PM
The difference in use on models probaly has to do with protruding lens elements of the lens and TC...

Rooz
09-13-2007, 05:54 PM
the compatibility issue has to do with the protruding glass element at the front of the TC which won;t marry up to alot of lens'.

FWIW, i tried soligor and kenko TC's on my 70-200VR aswell before deciding on the nikon 1.7 just to see which one worked better. they all worked fine with all lens and camera functions. i found the nikon model a little sharper and certianly built beautifully which is why i paid a little more to get the nikon one. in saying that it is frustrating i can;t mount it on my sigma 150mm so if i had my time again, i'd buy the soligor one.

don;t know if it was my imagination or not or the changing lighting conditions i shot in but i found the kenko ones had my 70-200 AF slower and had a bit less light available thru the lens. so i don;t recommend the kenko ones.

achuang
09-13-2007, 07:47 PM
Here's what I reckon you should do:
D3
D300
14-24/2.8
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8 VR
85/1.4
SB800
TC14E

Forget the 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR and go straight for a 300/2.8 VR!

The 85/1.4 has old AF too - but still a cracking lens from what I hear.

I second that. I'd choose that setup or similar whether it be canon or nikon. And would defitely choose the 300 f2.8VR with TC over an 80-400 zoom. Especially the nikon 80-400 because it isn't AFS, so it uses the camera body's AF motor and would not be as quick to focus as your canon 100-400L.