I have a similar post over on the Canon-mount SLR forum, but would like to hear from some Nikon experts.
Last month we had a break-in at our home and the thieves stole my camera bag that contained the majority of my gear. I had a kit based on a Canon 1D and an XSi. After the theft only have a minimal number of Canon specific items.
Therefore, I am considering rebuilding my camera kit based around a Nikon D700. I have read a lot of reviews and comparisons relating to the D700 and have been in a store to play around with one briefly. Came away impressed. For me the main attractions are the focus system, hi ISO performance, build quality and having 'smaller' files to work with (PC is a few years old).
I love portrait photography, particularly kids, and macro. Prefer natural light. I also use my cameras to take snapshots of families and outings.
I am quite familiar with Canon's lineup of lenses, but have virtually no knowledge of Nikon's other than reading some of the reviews on this site. Third party products are OK. My general needs are:
* a mid zoom to be used as a walk around for family snapshots and ad hoc photo opportuniites
* a fast prime with good bokeh, primarily for portraits, somewhere in the 85mm-105mm range
* a fast prime in the 35-50mm range
* a lens with macro ability
* a flash
* a cheap wide angle prime for occasional landscape type photography. This lens will see minimal use, but would still need to have good performance (will be used almost solely stopped down to f8-11).
Feel free to pipe up with any other gems of the Nikon line worth considering.
If I was to stick with Canon, just to give some point of reference, in fulfilling the above general needs I would be looking at something along the lines of a Tammy 28-75mm, Canon 85/1.8 or 85/1.2, Canon 35/1.4 or 50/1.4, Sigma 150mm Macro, 430EXII or 580EXII, and not sure about the cheap wide prime.
Budget is likely to be around $5000. Would normally buy all second hand, but in this case may be buying some stuff new. So, if you were starting from scratch with a Nikon system, given my photography preferences and needs above, what would you choose?
cheap wide angle prime could be the 24 2.8 (even NIB kind of cheap) or the 20mm 2.8 used. some don't like the 20mm 2.8 on digital (FX or DX), if you can try somewhere would try it first.
85mm primes have good bokeh and excels at portraits according to many. The 1.4 is pricey but considered the best. 1.8 much cheaper and not too shabby a performer.
We have the 35 F2. Nice lens, meant for FX. there is the 35 1.8, meant for DX, will have a slight vignette on the d700. Some like the 1.8 on the 700, some don't. Try if can before buying. Newer lens as well so second hand may not be a discount, or one worth losing warranty over. Judgement call for that one.
Or the 50mm 1.4. D or G. D is cheaper and good. G changes mostly cosmetic (will be sealed though on your d700 with the rubber gasket, get a filter and you are completely weather sealed). got a blade upgrade that rounds out bokeh a little better. Also have the nifty 50 (50mm 1.8). real cheap even new and a lens many say is good. I liked so did many others.
This all nikon stuff, don't know 3rd party so can't comment on it.
Normal zoom:
nothing wrong with the Tamron 28-75 2.8 (other than a slow AF), this has been my favorite for some time, but the 24-70 2.8 Nikkor is even better (and the extra 4mm on the short side have become very important to me)
portrait lens: I use the 85 1.8 a much cheaper solution than the 85 1.4, but many find the 1.4 superlative and with a better bokeh... up to you if you want to spend that kind of money for a 85mm lens.
General prime: I love the 50 1.4 and I would definitely recommend it.
As far as macro is concerned, I would look at the Nikkor 105VR (excellent) and the Sigma 150mm, depending on your favorite working distance.
The flash: just go for the best: the amazing SB-900, better functionality, nice user interface, but huge...
Last but not least, the wide prime is a delicate subject: the 14-24 2.8 zoom is expensive but outperforms all primes, and really is THE solution for wide angle shooting, and if you go for the 24-70, you'll need to go significantly wider than 24mm... another option (I know it is not a prime) is the Sigma 12-24, I don't own one but several people on this forum like that lens a lot (it is full frame and even wider than the Nikkor)
My advise is to start with film. Plain and simple. Nikon F's are cheap. Old Nikkors are cheap. You don't drive a 1300cc motorbike with a learners licence.
ReyGay wrote:
My advise is to start with film. Plain and simple. Nikon F's are cheap. Old Nikkors are cheap. You don't drive a 1300cc motorbike with a learners licence.
....and you don't learn nearly as quickly with film! People tend to take far fewer shots and experiment less with film because every shot costs orders of magnitude more than digital, and you also don't get the kind of instant feedback you are looking for. By the time you get the developed shot in your hands it's too late to try something different.
The analogy with the motorbike it not a good one. Sorry.
I recently just made the switch myself. I had a Canon 40D and 5D with nice canon lenses, and even one lone Tamron. The Tamron 28-75 is a great lens, but here is my recommendation. Buy a NEW D700. Then, watch the buy/sell forums and pick up a lightly used Nikon 24-70 2.8. This thing ROCKS on the D700!! I have two Nikon flashes now, an SB-600 and SB-800. They are both great, but I hear the new SB-900 is excellent, although a little pricey right now.
Good luck, you'll love the D700 with its pro autofocus and high ISO. Best DSLR on the market right now.
Jun 11, 2009 at 07:40 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
You might consider a D300 and get better glass. With a $5000 budget the D700 eats up $3000 leaving only $2000 for glass. You end up with a lot slower consumer level glass that way.
A D300 costs $1800 leaving $3200 for glass. FX is over-rated for the price difference, especially if you are going to put cheep glass on it. By going DX, for lenses to meet your needs you can get 17-55, 50f/1.8, 105VR micro and a 10-24.
Andre Labonte wrote:
You might consider a D300 and get better glass. With a $5000 budget the D700 eats up $3000 leaving only $2000 for glass. You end up with a lot slower consumer level glass that way.
I got my D700 new from Amazon a few weeks ago for $2350. Got my 24-70 2.8 from this forum used for $1399.
So, for an extra $550, you get the best DSLR on the market and high ISO that beats everyone.
Jun 11, 2009 at 07:58 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
photomatt88 wrote:
I got my D700 new from Amazon a few weeks ago for $2350. Got my 24-70 2.8 from this forum used for $1399.
So, for an extra $550, you get the best DSLR on the market and high ISO that beats everyone.
Well, I'm not sure I would call the D700 the "best" DSLR on the market, though it is one of the best offered today.
$2350 for a D700 is a steal. Is it a USA model? I think you will be hard pressed to find that again from a reputable dealer. I qouted B&H new prices; I'm sure you can get a similar or even better deal on a D300. There are advantages to both formats. High ISO performance is over-rated IMO. It all depends on what you are doing. For me, the effective reach of the DX format is 10X more important than 1-stop of high ISO performance. I see a lot of people going for the D700 when they would be better served by a D300, that's all.
I guess I did get a good deal, and yes it is a USA model, from a reputable dealer "Amazon.com". Amazon's current price is $2479, still a far cry from the original quote that someone posted of $3000.
jshowyin wrote:
If I was to stick with Canon, just to give some point of reference, in fulfilling the above general needs I would be looking at something along the lines of a Tammy 28-75mm, Canon 85/1.8 or 85/1.2, Canon 35/1.4 or 50/1.4, Sigma 150mm Macro, 430EXII or 580EXII, and not sure about the cheap wide prime.
The systems are really not that different. There are equivalent lenses for most things. So you can easily convert your Canon list above to Nikon:
Tamron 28-75 -> same
85L -> 85/1.4 (or perhaps the 105/2DC, which some prefer)
35L -> urmm...yeah ok, there isn't one unless you don't mind trying manual lenses: 35/1.4 AIS
50/1.4 -> 50/1.4
Sigma 150 -> same
430EX -> SB600
580EX -> SB900
jshowyin wrote:
* a mid zoom to be used as a walk around for family snapshots and ad hoc photo opportuniites
* a fast prime with good bokeh, primarily for portraits, somewhere in the 85mm-105mm range
* a fast prime in the 35-50mm range
* a lens with macro ability
* a flash
* a cheap wide angle prime for occasional landscape type photography. This lens will see minimal use, but would still need to have good performance (will be used almost solely stopped down to f8-11).
If I was to stick with Canon, just to give some point of reference, in fulfilling the above general needs I would be looking at something along the lines of a Tammy 28-75mm, Canon 85/1.8 or 85/1.2, Canon 35/1.4 or 50/1.4, Sigma 150mm Macro, 430EXII or 580EXII, and not sure about the cheap wide prime.
D700
50 f1.4G or the 50 1.4 Sigma
35 f2 Nikon
24 f2.8 Nikon
85 f1.4 Nikon
I was a canon shooter for 4 years and immensely enjoyed shooting with the 300D, then the 20D and a host of “L” lenses. Wanting to upgrade my body so I purchased a 40D, which did not focus properly. After returning the camera body I felt discouraged, as I had kept reading about the mounting quality issues with Canon. I decided to just sit on my purchase and wait for 5D mark 2 or something else……….something else came along alright. I was in a store and they had a D300 and for laughs and giggles I picked it up. It had a 35mm f2 on it and when I picked it up it just seemed to fit like a glove. I can honestly say what sold me on the switch was that it just “felt right” The ergonomics of the Nikon felt so different from what I was use to with the Canon. It seemed silly to dump all of my equipment and switch to the dark side but I thought if this camera feels this good to hold I will probably take it more places and simply shoot more pictures. For me that is the ultimate goal.
I went online sold my Canon stuff and have never looked back. I love the low noise in 1600 iso, I love the intuitive control lay out, the sound of the shutter and the image quality that I get every time I use it.
What is also interesting is I shoot with a Pro doing weddings every Saturday and he uses Canon and he is constantly plagued with issues. His 580 flash works half the time, he returned two copies of the 24-70 L as his Tammy 17-55 2.8 was sharper in all tests, and the mounting error and focusing issues. In all fairness his 70-200 2.8 is sword sharp and makes killer images. Every Saturday after the wedding he contemplates making the switch. The usual phrase goes “One more issue and I’m switching.” He does love the layout of Canon and that works for him and he makes amazing pictures with his gear.
Again I have come to realize that it’s more the person behind the camera and as long as they are comfortable with the tools they are using, than its all good. Some people love Canon some love Nikon. I wish though that Nikon would update their full frame prime line-up.
I have now moved to a D700 and find that I have found the camera for me.
My final word is that I am enjoying using Nikon and am happy that I switched. I also have enjoyed everyone’s support here in this forum.
photomatt88 wrote:
I guess I did get a good deal, and yes it is a USA model, from a reputable dealer "Amazon.com". Amazon's current price is $2479, still a far cry from the original quote that someone posted of $3000.
Cool. I asked about the vendor only because Amazon often directs you to other vendors, not always straight from Amazon.com. That is a great price. Here is the B&H link ... turns out there is a $300 instance rebate, so the price is actually $2700 at B&H.
If you follow the link above to B&H for the D700, then click the suggested retail price, it will put it in your cart and show you the real price. $2,349.95 with free shipping.
Still the best deal after all the Nikon price increases. The low when I bought mine in December was $2.319.95, so only $30 more. The D300 hit a low of about $1350 and now its $1570 (you have to put it in the cart too...) The D300 was as high as $1699 there recently.
I have both, and they are both great cameras, but I think the IQ from the D700 is better. It is a more expensive camera, so it probably should be (FX vs. DX aside). I love the D300, and the extra reach is priceless if you shoot birds, etc. but for the type of stuff he described, the D700 would be my recommendation. Whenever I don't need the reach, I prefer the D700.
Jun 11, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Good call roppda, I did not try putting it in my cart and thus did not see the price difference. It looks like B&H's code for when there is a price drop by adding to cart is when they say "suggested retail price" as oppsed to just "price". At any rate, you save nearly $800 by going with the D300. That's not to mention the money you save on lenses. I hear you about the antedotal IQ improvement of the D700, but I have yet to see any true evidence of it except at higher ISO numbers. Again, it's just another option the OP might want to consider.
Would not a D300 do the job here, put the rest of the money into the lenses...12-24/ 17-55 / 70-200vr would cover nearly all you needs, add a Canon 500D for close ups to the front of your 70-200vr.
With a budget of $5000 I would get the best Nikkor FX glass first (used if possible) 24-70 & 70-200 or 80-200 AF-S & 80-400 VR then buy a body with what was left over. This might only leave $700 for a used D90 but a great camera to start with and right now the best for the money. You could use the onboard flash and High ISO for now and get a SB900 later.
My point is that great glass goes up in price and great cameras always go down. After learning the Nikon system on the D90 the price of a used D700 will drop enough to pick up a FullFrame camera and you can always use the D90 for DX factor, D-movies, and backup. I got mine for a low cost lightweight trip camera and have also had to use it as a backup while my D3 is in for a buffer upgrade. I am surprised the D90 has exceeded my expectations so well. I like it better than a D300 and it gives me better pictures too.
Starting with FX on a budget and preferring wide primes, I would get a used D700.
and choose my Nikkors from:
TiltShift 24 f/3.5 , 45 f/2.8 , and 85 f/2.8
DeFocus 105 f/2 and 135 f/2
AF 14 f/2.8, 20 f/2.8, 24 f/2.8, 28 f/2.8, 35 f/1.2, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.4, 105 f/2.8 VR, 200 f/2
Generally the more they cost the better they are with the exception of the 50 f/1.8
I included the tele 200 because it is too good not to list.
RRRoger wrote:
With a budget of $5000 I would get the best Nikkor FX glass first (used if possible) 24-70 & 70-200 or 80-200 AF-S & 80-400 VR then buy a body with what was left over. This might only leave $700 for a used D90 but a great camera to start with and right now the best for the money. You could use the onboard flash and High ISO for now and get a SB900 later.
My point is that great glass goes up in price and great cameras always go down. After learning on the D90 the price of a used D700 will drop enough to pick up a FullFrame camera and you can always use the D90 for DX factor, D-movies, and backup. I got mine for a low cost lightweight trip camera and have also had to use it as a backup while my D3 is in for a buffer upgrade. I am surprised that has exceeded my expectations so well. I like it better than a D300 and it gives me better pictures too....Show more →
This is the best advice I have heard all day. Get good FX lenses first. Any body can take great pics with a 24-70 2.8 Man I love this lens.
