p.1 #1 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
Hello! I come from the Canon world and I am thinking about switching systems to Nikon. I mainly shoot people portraits, senior pictures, etc. I shoot indoors and outdoors, although I don't have much room indoors to work with.
On the Canon side I use a full frame 5D with quality "L" lenses.
I love sharp lenses.
Help me validate my selections on the Nikon side to replace my Canon gear. I am looking at the following:
D700 body
Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
I'm pretty sure nobody will have any issues or other recommendations for the D700 body, but how does my lens lineup look for portraiture? Are there any better lenses that I should be looking at? I'm trying to keep the entire purchase around $5k - $6k
p.1 #2 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
What L-lenses where you using?
The 24-70 is one of Nikon's best and better than Canon's counterpart.
Nikon has a 85/1.4 which is almost of the same quality as Canon's 85/1.2 II. The AF is much quicker on the Nikon.
The 105/2.0 DC is also a very fine lens and there is a 135/2.0 DC as well (although not that good).
For portraits the 70-200VR is a very good option. Only flaw is relatively soft corners and easily correctable vignetting(in camera or with PP).
p.1 #3 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
The 24-70 f/2.8 AFS is just as sharp as (if not sharper than) most of the primes covered by its range. You won't be dissapointed, even coming from using Canon's "L" glass on your 5D. I've used one for multiple portrait shoots, and I can't find a fault with the lens (other than its weight perhaps, but I normally use kit lenses or primes in this range, so I just need to get used to that). I'm going to be getting one soon for use on my D90.
I'd go with the 85mm f/1.4 instead of the 105mm f/2.0 DC. You get a full stop greater amount of light, which is useful as a fast short telephoto for concerts, weddings, or action sports. The AF speed is slightly faster on the 85. Both are excellent, but I'd rather have the 85 f/1.4 (aka the "Cream Machine" due to its buttery-smooth bokeh).
Also, consider getting the 70-200mm f/2.8 AFS VR (my favorite lens. EVER.) or an older 80-200mm f/2.8 AFS at some point. The 70-200 f/2.8 is perfect as a portrait lens (at least in my usage it is), and it completely nukes the background and foreground with smooth, creamy bokeh at f/2.8-f/4. The 80-200 f/2.8 AFS focuses just as fast and does not experience corner softening, but it also lacks VR (Nikon VR = Canon IS). The focusing speed on both is frighteningly fast on consumer grade Nikon cameras, and on pro bodies, neither miss a shot
So my kit for $5k-6k would be:
Nikon D700 ($2100 used/$2700 new after rebate)
24-70mm f/2.8 AFS ($1400 used/$1700 new)
70-200mm f/2.8 AFS VR ($1500 used/$2000 new)
85mm f/1.4 ($900 used/$1100 new)
I'd get the 2 f/2.8 zooms first for the most flexibility and zoom range coverage, and get the 85mm f/1.4 later as an add on. It all depends on whether you buy used or new, and how flexible your budget is! If you buy all used, you're looking at around $5900 with a full setup. If you get everything new, you're looking at about $7500 for the full setup.
p.1 #5 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
Thanks all for the comments.
I currently use (canon) 24-105 f4L for my indoor stuff with studio strobes, and I use 70-200 f2.8 for my outdoor stuff.
I had thought about the 85, but it would be too tight for my indoor stuff and too short for my outdoor stuff. I like the outdoor working distance of 100mm +.
I know Nikon has a comparable 70-200 2.8 but it is a little pricey for me at the moment if I also get the 24-70. Plus I would like to start working with a fast prime, which led me to the 105 f2.
I don't mind buying used lenses, but I will need them fast if I make the switch. I'll be selling my Canon gear to fund the Nikon purchases and I can't be without too long. So, waiting for used stuff to turn up, may not be an option.
p.1 #10 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
photomatt88 wrote:
I currently use (canon) 24-105 f4L for my indoor stuff with studio strobes, and I use 70-200 f2.8 for my outdoor stuff.
I know Nikon has a comparable 70-200 2.8 but it is a little pricey for me at the moment if I also get the 24-70. Plus I would like to start working with a fast prime, which led me to the 105 f2.
Then, you will be happy with 24-70+70-200 for sure. I don't have first hand experience with 70-200, but I do with 24-70 and it's far better than what I expected from my Canon experience. It is expensive, but is well worth it.
And I do have 105VR and that works very well as well, if you don't need reach up to 200mm.
p.1 #11 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
If you dont mind used and can afford $1000 look for the 80-200AFS to go along with the 24-70. Its every bit as good as the 70-200 (some argue better opitcally) except for the lack of VR. If you dont need VR that could save you $600-800.
photomatt88 wrote:
I know Nikon has a comparable 70-200 2.8 but it is a little pricey for me at the moment if I also get the 24-70. Plus I would like to start working with a fast prime, which led me to the 105 f2.
I don't mind buying used lenses, but I will need them fast if I make the switch. I'll be selling my Canon gear to fund the Nikon purchases and I can't be without too long. So, waiting for used stuff to turn up, may not be an option.
p.1 #12 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
ryan stewart wrote:
If you dont mind used and can afford $1000 look for the 80-200AFS to go along with the 24-70. Its every bit as good as the 70-200 (some argue better opitcally) except for the lack of VR. If you dont need VR that could save you $600-800.
Thanks Ryan, that may be an option as I usually use a tripod with all my portrait shots anyway.
p.1 #14 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
Chris Dees wrote:
What L-lenses where you using?
The 24-70 is one of Nikon's best and better than Canon's counterpart.
Nikon has a 85/1.4 which is almost of the same quality as Canon's 85/1.2 II. The AF is much quicker on the Nikon.
The 105/2.0 DC is also a very fine lens and there is a 135/2.0 DC as well (although not that good).
For portraits the 70-200VR is a very good option. Only flaw is relatively soft corners and easily correctable vignetting(in camera or with PP).
That depends on the aperture being used with the 24-70's. From F2.8 to F4.0 the Nikon has the edge, but from F5.6 to F11, the Canon is sharper. So for strobes, the Canon is better. Also, the build on the Canon is slightly better imho (but both are good). People who complain about the Canon version probably had poor copies (which used to happen a lot a few years ago).
The 85L is MUCH better than the Nikon 85/1.4 in IQ, but the Nikon is still dece.
On full frame, the Canon 70-200's are better than the Nikons, but the Nikons are still not bad (the corners are a problem).
Personally, for portraiture, I would stick with Canon since you already have the better L lenses, and get a 5D2 over the D700. With the money you save not switching systems and on expensive Nikon glass, you get twice the resolution, and some money saved for a new lens or two... and HD video to boot
p.1 #15 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
musclepics wrote:
That depends on the aperture being used with the 24-70's. From F2.8 to F4.0 the Nikon has the edge, but from F5.6 to F11, the Canon is sharper. So for strobes, the Canon is better. Also, the build on the Canon is slightly better imho (but both are good). People who complain about the Canon version probably had poor copies (which used to happen a lot a few years ago).
The 85L is MUCH better than the Nikon 85/1.4 in IQ, but the Nikon is still dece.
On full frame, the Canon 70-200's are better than the Nikons, but the Nikons are still not bad (the corners are a problem).
Personally, for portraiture, I would stick with Canon since you already have the better L lenses, and get a 5D2 over the D700. With the money you save not switching systems and on expensive Nikon glass, you get twice the resolution, and some money saved for a new lens or two... and HD video to boot ...Show more →
I have both systems and they are Apples to Apples. Both 24-70 are excellent lenses and only the most anal pixel peepers would find any difference from F4 to F11 at F2.8 the Nikon has a slight edge. The 70-200's once again are both stellar. I prefer the Nikon version it is much sharper at all apertures in the center. Canons 70-200 has the advantage in Minimum focus distance about 5 feet less. Lets talk about the 85's both are incredible lenses the Canon is much sharper at 1.2 (duh). The Nikon is IMHO is at least a sharp if not better at F1.4 they seem to be equal at all other apertures. The Nikon is also much smaller and focuses much quicker. With that being said I still miss my 85L the bokeh was the king.
p.1 #16 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
Why are you switching? I'm just wondering as I did exactly the same 5 months ago. I take exactly the same type of images with the D700 as I did with the 5D, there was no wow factor as I shot full frame for 3 years with the Canon. The 24-70G is worth the price of admission on the D700, it was way ahead of my calibrated Canon L. BUT I miss my 17-40L /24-105L/ 70-200 L IS F4 combo. I'm a generalist these days and the D700 handels all I shoot. If I was shooting a lot of portraits boy I'd hesitate.
The grass can appear greener on the other side, I had a loaner D700/24-70G from Nikon for a month before taking the plunge, but even today I do have second and third thoughts...
Please no flames here just an honest opinion of someone who made the move and shoots daily.
p.1 #17 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
thedruid wrote:
Why are you switching? I'm just wondering as I did exactly the same 5 months ago.
Matt,
I believe thedruid asked a valid question. Especially now, since the D700 is a tad short on MP compared to the 5D MarkII. It would be different if the D700x with at least 21MP would be available right now. Most people considering the switch because of the AF but you are shooting portraits and senior pictures... Well, Matt, it is your money though. Good luck!
p.1 #18 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
Bruce Sawle wrote:
I have both systems and they are Apples to Apples. Both 24-70 are excellent lenses and only the most anal pixel peepers would find any difference from F4 to F11 at F2.8 the Nikon has a slight edge. The 70-200's once again are both stellar. I prefer the Nikon version it is much sharper at all apertures in the center. Canons 70-200 has the advantage in Minimum focus distance about 5 feet less. .
Yeah, that's pretty much what I saw with the 24-70's, very close, with an edge to one or the other depending on the aperture.
Are you using full frame or crop on the Nikon? Because Dpreview shows that while the Nikon 70-200 is sharper on the crops, the Canon 70-200 is much better on the full frame sensor.
For example, this is what I get with the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS at 200mm wide open. And 200mm is that lens' softest range. I get even sharper shots at 135mm. I use a 1D so I'm half way between normal crop and full frame.
p.1 #20 · New to Nikon, help me pick Portrait lenses
musclepics wrote:
Yeah, that's pretty much what I saw with the 24-70's, very close, with an edge to one or the other depending on the aperture.
Are you using full frame or crop on the Nikon? Because Dpreview shows that while the Nikon 70-200 is sharper on the crops, the Canon 70-200 is much better on the full frame sensor.
For example, this is what I get with the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS at 200mm wide open. And 200mm is that lens' softest range. I get even sharper shots at 135mm. I use a 1D so I'm half way between normal crop and full frame.
I think the fact that the systems are so close is why I don't think it's worth switching from one to the other.
Starting from scratch though, the D700 is a really nice camera. ...Show more →
I am shooting with a full frame D3x and while the Canon is a bit better in the corners the Nikon to me is better in the middle of the frame. This is where it is crucial for me as I shoot primarily portraits. But as I said before they are both so close that I would be happy with either one.
