Hey!

As a canon shooter thinking about switching to nikon, I'm a bit worried about primes. I've been told that both the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are good, but are both those in production? And is the 35 f/2 the best wide alternative on fullframe?

Ulrik

From 50mm up there are enough prime choices, including the lenses you mentioned. Unfortunately there was a reduced market for certain focal lengths when Nikon did not have the 24x36 sensors, so many of the older models were discontinued. 24, 28, and 35/1.4 lenses would be nice.

EB

1. You don't need to buy "in production" lenses. One of the nice things about Nikon is all the older - yet still excellent - primes that can be bought and used with the D200, D300 etc...

2. Check out Bjorn Rorslett's website for information about lenses. Good unbiased reviews.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Look under lenses and for a quick summary then look at the "best of the best" section. The 28mm f/2 (I have one) is excellent.

I had the 28/2 for about 10 years. While it was good lens for its time, I'd expect better at large apertures today and looking forward to D3X or similar bodies. Some people anticipate new Nikkor wide primes at PK this year, but who knows for sure.

EB

Thanks for your advice guys! I'll check out Bjorns site, he has lots of good info!

I was "smart" enough to prepare myself for a canon fullframe future with the 24 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.8, but I suspect that believing in a fully enviromentally sealed 5d MKII is a bit far fetched, so I'm trying to find out what kind of gear and what kind of setup I should aim for if I switch to the other side.

The release of Nikon's excellent 14-24 slowed a lot of the complaints about primes, but many would still like to see some new fast wide glass. If you want to go new and prefer fast wide primes, at the moment Canon is your best bet. It also doesn't require a complete change out of glass when upgrading the body, as switching to a different brand would. We keep our fingers crossed, and with many of the latest releases by Nikon I don't doubt it will happen, but we really don't know what is coming as EB-1 mentioned above.

David

ulrikft wrote:
I've been told that the...85 1.4 [is] good
That is an understatement.

ulrikft wrote:
Thanks for your advice guys! I'll check out Bjorns site, he has lots of good info!

I was "smart" enough to prepare myself for a canon fullframe future with the 24 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.8, but I suspect that believing in a fully enviromentally sealed 5d MKII is a bit far fetched, so I'm trying to find out what kind of gear and what kind of setup I should aim for if I switch to the other side.

Full environmental sealing is commonly reserved for expensive, limited production gear for military and aerospace use. We mere mortals use UW housings.

EB

I have 20mm, 35mm, two 50mm (f/1.8 and 1.4), 60mm, 85mm f/1.8, 105mm and two 300mm (f/4 afs & f/2.8 AI)

I notice that 20mm, 60mm, 85mm and both 300mm are great.

I think the current Nikon 18 and 20 will show significant amounts of CA on a 12 megapixel or sharper sensor. The 24 isn't that great either. The 14-24 is second to none, but big and heavy. The Nikkor 17-35 is still a good lens - better than Canon's 16-35 mk1, but probably not as good as the 17-40 or 16-35 mk2. So in fact, the wideangle prime situation is not good, with the rare 28f1.4 costing the earth.

Be afraid Be Very Afraid!

To answer the question, both the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 are in production.

Thanks again for your answers!

I guess I have to bide my time and bite trough a few sets of nails until canon reveals it's new 5d.

How is the weather sealing on the d700 then? if it is like the d300/d3? It can stand light rain and snow?

I don't know offhand, but I can't imagine Nikon taking a step _down_ from the D300 to the D700. and for what it's worth, I've shot in light rain and snow with both my D70 and my D300. I also saw another photographer get completely soaked while shooting the Steeplechase water pit with his 20d/30d/40d (not sure which), and all seemed to be fine afterwards. Is it really an issue with your current body?

--xsdg

ulrikft wrote:
Hey!

As a canon shooter thinking about switching to nikon, I'm a bit worried about primes. I've been told that both the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are good, but are both those in production? And is the 35 f/2 the best wide alternative on fullframe?

Ulrik

While the D700 looks a great body, the absence of these lenses is keeping me from going there. My most used lenses on the 5d are 24L, 35L, 85 and 200L together with the 24-105L. There really are no comparable offerings from Nikon so I am waiting to see what and when the 5dII is. Better be good for Canon's sake!

On the other hand Canon have no response to the 14-24 which looks like one sweet lens.

I had Nikon's 85/1.4 in the film days and rate it OK but it is very old, fringes easily , is not AFS and does not compare well with the 85L.

I will say this again, based on the performance of the 85 1.2 L USM on a 1D IIN, there will be no significant advantage in adding AFS to the 85 1.4 save one and that would be the lack of mechanical noise. The 85 1.4 isn't exactly loud as it is.

The 85 1.4 is a stellar lens capable of incredible results however it is not the 85 1.2L nor will it ever be. That said I have yet to have a client ask me "why does this image look better than that one?" when presenting images of an event where both were used. On the other hand there are some photographers that swear the art director demands the lens and know the difference. I think that's stretching it but hey, your the pro and only you know what you "need".

I have had two copies of the 24-105L and if anyone is happy with the results/quality that lens produces I am shocked they would be willing to discount the Nikkor 85 1.4 as a quality lens.

Beyond the fast wides I think the Nikon equivalents are quite comparable.

These are my opinions.

Rene

ulrikft wrote:
How is the weather sealing on the d700 then? if it is like the d300/d3? It can stand light rain and snow?

I've heard that the D700 has weather sealing like the D3, which is somewhat better than the D300 (apparently). Personally, I've shot my D300 in light rain for extended periods, and no problem. On the one occasion I've got it smothered with wet snow, it didn't give the slightest trouble either. I wouldn't hesitate on that score. Here's the evidence

Ah! That looks terribly good.. Thanks again!

Qranc wrote:

I have had two copies of the 24-105L and if anyone is happy with the results/quality that lens produces I am shocked they would be willing to discount the Nikkor 85 1.4 as a quality lens.

These are my opinions.

Rene

Well I can only express my opinion too. Based on personal ownership and extensive use of both lenses, Your mileage obviously varied.

I have a beater copy of the Nikon 18mm f2.8 AF-D that i got from FM'er Bellyface. I use it on my FE2 daily, and quite a bit on the 5D that i just sold. Wide open, it had good (enough) center frame performance, and didn't drop off much towards the edges. It does have some falloff until stopped down to 4 or 5.6, and doesn't keep horizons perfectly straight, but it's my favorite wide.

Why? because it's small, portable, and when you're lucky enough to find a used copy in "bad" shape like i did, it's CHEAP!
I would say mine performs at least as good as the Canon 16-35mk1, but is far more portable. 18mm is, IMO, a great focal length.

The Nikon 20mm's are pretty good, i think most would be happy with them on a D3/700. I used one on my 5D for a few months and thought it was just fine.

The faster Nikon 24 and 28 AIS lenses are great, but as mentioned, are decades old designs due an update to compare to modern optics.

The 35/1.4 is a blast to use and carry, due to its small size and great feel- but wide open it is very soft and low-contrast. Stopped down much at all, it gets GREAT, but it is nowhere near the 35L wide open.

There are numerous great Nikon 50's.
50/2 AI is reported to be an EXCELLENT performer, i have one on the way from KEH and i'll know more soon. My cousin and I refer to it as the "NiKron", due to it being a cheap alternative to the Leica 50/2 Summicron-R.
50/1.8 AI is cheap, small, and ok. Wide open has very low contrast and not much to write home about.
50/1.4 AIS has some aggressive bokeh wide open that some users just won't like. Very sharp lens, i highly reccomend it. I've heard the AF version only got better(at least the newest version).
50/1.2 is rather soft, but has a nice look. Can be quite cheap, for a f1.2... 55/1.2 is similar boat.
58/1.2 noct-nikkor is said to be one of the best 50's available for SLR use, and from pictures it looks to be true. The Rokkor 58 might have dethroned it as far as accessiblity goes, since the Noct is so damned expensive, but you can't use the Rokkor on Nikon.
5.8CM 1.4 Nippon Kogaku- very old lens, was the first 1.4 standard avail for the F mount system. Made low numbers, apparently due to complex construction and tendency to suffer from shifting elements- my copy won't currently reach infinity due to this i believe. Other than that, it is a great performer. Awesome bokeh, great great great sharpness, esp for a lens from 1957.

the 85/1.4 AIS/AF-D are both great lenses, but the US market value for them is quite often highly overblown. I wouldn't pay the common US price for either of these lenses- you could pick one up on a convenient trip to Korea or Japan and save some haha.

105/1.8 AIS totally kicks booty. Very heavy lens though, like the 85/1.4's, and takes an annoying 62mm filter. Razor sharp, but doesn't have good contrast until 2.8 or slower.

Great hazard duty shot! Glad to know my lowly D300 can do that! Thanks!

Joe

Hey who said it's "lowly" It was out there in light rain for the best part of an hour, and I changed lenses a couple of times too. It looked best a few months ago with snow on the prism and gathering inside the lens hood - too bad I didn't have a compact with me to record that

Here we go again, my love/hate relationship with Nikon.

As has been mentioned Nikon's weakness is with fast wide primes. Nikon used to be the king of the hill with this class of lenses, but no more.

People commonly say that they expect Nikon to bring out new 24 f1.4, 28 f1.4, 35 f1.4 lenses, and I hope they do, because the range of Nikkors is seriously undermined without them.

Yes the 14-24 f2.8 is an amazing lens (and if it had an aperture ring I would have bought one), but f1.4 it ain't.

The big problem with new fast wides is the lead time to design, test and produce them. The classic Nikon fast wide was the unmatched 28mm f1.4, available now only secondhand sadly. The following link perhaps explains why there have been no new fast wides from Nikon recently:

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/nikkor/n28_e.htm

I quote:

"Within Nikon, as a rule one optical designer is responsible for one product from start of design through volume production, though this lens involved a total of four optical designers and it was at last completed after a lot of hard work. In 1994, the lens was placed on the market about ten years after the start of development."

Ten Years

I could be wrong about no new fast Nikkors for a while, but if you really need fast wides then you might be better advised to stay with Canon.

Thanks a bunch for your answers again! Informative and good answers!

My main application for fast primes is (of course) avilable light photography and concert photography. I seldom wish for something much wider than my 24 1.4 at a 1.6 crop body, so a 50 1.4 might just do the trick, but for the times I really wish i had a 20-30 something prime, it would be great to have the ability. I guess I have to weigh how much I like weather sealing (beer sealing.. :P ), better lowlight af and eventually fps (these being nikon) and how much I like my 24 1.4 L (being canon).

Thanks again!

Oh man, Nikon has concert photography lenses on lockdown!

35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.4, 105/1.8... these are all amazing at shooting dark shows.