New Nikon convert.
- This topic has 25 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated Oct 20, 2013 at 12:15 am by
.
-
Posts
-
As I posted in another topic, In a rush of blood and with little thought given to outcomes, I sold all my Canon gear and bought myself a Nikon D800e.
I didn’t need to change really, but after many years with the 1DsIII’s I was ready for something new and Canon didn’t have anything out or even on the horizon.
Also, because Im half ass retired and don’t shoot everyday I wanted the lower the weight of a non-pro body.
(yes, I realise I’m missing out on the bomb-proof nature of the 1 series and the D4’s, but promise to be extra careful ! lol)What I like the most about my new camera is the resolution due in part to the mega pixel count and the lack of an anti-aliasing filter. (Low pass)
The reward for getting things right is simply stunning.
My most used lenses now are the 28 1.8 and the 60 & 105 macros because they’re very light, very sharp and cover a lot of situations.
I also have the 85 1.4 and 14-24, but they don’t get much of a run yet.
A 70-200 is on the buy list and the 24-70 a maybe..
(will also need a back-up body or 2 – but no firm decisions yet)Compared to a Canon, the ergonomics of the Nikon (in my big mitts anyway) leaves a bit to be desired.
Nikon still haven’t got it right IMHO, though it’s still a big improvement on the F4’s and FM’s I had in a previous life.
The build quality of the body seems pretty good even compared to the pro stuff, but I wouldn’t expect much else given how cheap they are.
The lenses seem solid enough, but the bayonet Nikon lens hoods suck and are WAY to easy to knock off – I’ve replaced most of them with B&W ones.
AF is very good with the AF-S lenses and seems very accurate.
On camera, or off camera TTL flash is also very good and a place where I feel Nikon have had it over Canon for a long time, though of late there’s not much in it.Lastly, color balance on the 800e is the best I’ve seen from Nikon, though is still a little bit of work around skin-tones.
I assume I will eventually get on top of it with more use and it’s certainly good enough with a tweak here and there.What will I miss most from the Canon stuff ?
Bomb proof bodies that served me well for 6 years.
The 85 1.2L shot under f2- Nikon have no answer for this one yet.Rant over – post some fishing pics soon.
In the meantime here’s the reason I don’t fish as much as I’d like !Attachments:
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Congrats on the switch David. You will enjoy the new gear and I’m sure there will be a few things missed as well. The 85mm f/1.4 is stellar and with the ISO range on the D800 I doubt you will find much fault with it even wide open.
One new toy you might consider that Canon lacks is the TC17EII 1.7x teleconverter. It is amazingly sharp on any prime or f/2.8 zoom, and superior in every way to any 2x TC on the market as well as only costing you 1.5 stops. If you pick up the 70-200 this creates a versatile combo for extra reach.
Looking forward to seeing some shots.
Hey David, With all of the IQ tests, scattered all over the internet, I can see that you must have scored very high, welcome back to the Nikon family. lol I am sure that you noticed, on the cover of the manual, it states: For IQ’s 160 and above so, well done ya Mensa freak ya… 🙂
Before anyone jumps on that, I am just kidding around and having a bit of camera wars fun. 🙂
David, the 105 is one of my favorite lens and a true go to for assignment work. Also, you would love the new 70-200 and the 24-70,both are excellent glass and my other 2 most used lenses.
I can’t share any personal experiences with the 14-24, as I am not a wide kind of guy. Not a big fan of the 85 1.2 and with your wider sensor, not sure that you may want that shallow of a DOF; so limited on your distance to subject and I feel that the 70-200 at 85mm 2.8 serves excellent. You may want to look at one of the older 80-400 mm lenses. Regardless of what a lot of recreational shooters reviewed, the lens is actually a very good lens and I have used it , @300mm, on fashion shoots. You may also want to look at the 50mm 1.4, I don’t use it but there is a time and place for it and if you like those expansion “life style” shots, it is a great choice.
Hope this helps
I use the 85 1.4 a lot on a D700 and it has been a favorite when I am not shooting with the 300 2.8 for head and shoulder work. It is not a lens I use a lot on the water based on what Ben talks about but I think it is an excellent choice for the D800 for portrait work which you mentioned David. Some examples below:
As Ben mentioned, the 50 1.4 is also a nice option. I like using it on the water when I am not shooting wide. The weight is far less then a 14-24 or the 17-35 that I almost use exclusively on the water. The problem with some of the wide angle glass is the bulk. It gets heavy after a full day.
Thanks for the sample shots guys and lens experiences – nice !
Jay, what’s ‘NANO’ – is there a cure ??
Ben, I hope nobody tries to confirm my IQ for the Nikons..lol
Brett, asked Nikon for a loan of the 1.7 TC !Just realised in the post, I gifted myself the faster version of the 85’s !
I have the 1.8 in fact.
(No, not cyber boasting I swear, just an idiot !-lol)
Maybe I cheaped out on the 85’s ?
At the time of trying all this stuff I had fishing and pack weight on the brain and thinking I would
be getting back into zooms for work stuff.I imagine a kit with both a full frame and crop body, the three 2.8 zooms and a Tele converter would cover any
event I’ve ever shot and save a lot of the panic lens changing I’ve been doing for the last few years from only using prime lenses.Anyway, one more fishing trip this month before winter shuts us down – better get the kids to school to keep the boss happy so she lets me go..
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Glad you asked David. That little gold “N” on your lens represents goodness.
N A N O is the Difference. 😉
<cite> @jaymorr said:</cite>
Glad you asked David. That little gold “N” on your lens represents goodness.N A N O is the Difference. 😉
Ahhhh – of course.
Whatever they’re doing, it’s sure working.
You can argue one brand vs the other in cameras till it hurts and normal people die of old age, but Nikon lenses are sharp !www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
All set now.
I’ve added a D7100, 70-200 2.8 VRII, a Sigma 17-50 2.8 alphabet soup
Geeze, I almost feel like being a photographer again.. lolwww.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
It’s interesting to me that Nikon’s ergonomics were the first thing you disliked, David. I’ve always shot Nikon and their ergonomics are usually the first thing I point to when comparing the differences with Canon; I find them to be very superior. It really just must be what you’re used to.
At the end of the day I believe the two companies are essentially equivalent.
Zach
Great lineup David and , as we both know Zack is mostly correct; in that the true difference is more apparent in the hands of truly gifted and qualified people, such as yourself. 🙂
If you get back into illustrative commercial assignment work, I might suggest the 200 2.0, one of the sharpest lenses Nikon has ever made. The same goes for the 300 2.8 but I would rather recommend the 200 -400 mm, AMAZING lens and fantastic for catalog or fashion and illustrative use, the compression is great and tack sharp.
Now for the honey, the Nikon Hotshoes are some of the best on the market and superior to the Canon line, they are just that good. Along with TTL function, you can also use the hotshots built in meter to function as an independent TTL functioning asset. What I mean by this is: Predetermine the amount of light that you want on your subject, per speed light, and set the hotshot to Aperture Mode. Set the aperture to your needs, lets say 5.6, even as a slaved light the meter will measure the bounce back and set the amount of light to be 5.6 on your subject. Very reliable and very easy to set and use, even better when they are all linked to a command module.
At the end of the day I believe the two companies are essentially equivalent.
ZachTotally agree.
It would be hard to go wrong with either.www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Ben, I had the Canon 200 F2 L and it was amazing for concerts and could be a real life saver for a quick portrait with a dud background.
I don’t know if I really need to stump up for the Nikon version, given my lack of high end work now, but I hear it’s a GREAT lens – maybe if I win the lottery !Not sure where to go in longer lenses, as I’ve very rarely used anything longer than a 200.
The idea of something like the 200-400 or the 300 f4 or even a 400 5.6 on the D7100 interests me for landscape stuff.
I did some basic travel tourism stuff for a few days for an online company recently and Nikon loaned me a 70-200 f4 and while it was awesome and very light, it lacked reach on the full frame for some of the distant landscapes and the odd bit of wildlife.Cheers.
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
David, you may want to take a look at the 80-400mm VR. Granted, the VR sucks but I don’t use that anyway, it is the old system that kind of kicks and is really meant for still’s, not panning. Additionally, it does auto focus slow but a strong application of focus zoning compensated for it very well. The image quality is great and, of course, it is built with the same quality of the other professional lenses. It has a tendency to hunt but again, focus zone mapping and practice helps a lot, functions fantastic in manual mode. I have actually used mine for Life Style and Fashion publication assignment work. Once you learn and practice with the lens, it works great for 400mm shots of those fast moving and diving coastal birds. For the money and for a professional lens, with this focal range, very hard to beat. It has been out for about 5 years and it my be, just maybe, one of the lenses that Nikon has on the table for upgrade and release. It definitely would be a great candidate and could use an upgraded VR component. Rent one and test it out, I think you may be rather impressed with the image quality, versatility but not necessarily with the lack of over simplified functionality. At 300mm, it is Fantastic and even at 400mm, I get nice crisp images.
Thanks Ben, I’ll see if Nikon will loan me the 80-400 for a test.
Did you see that DXO tested the 200 f2 you mention and rated it as the sharpest lens ever ?
They also compare it to the 70-200 2.8 and the difference is pretty amazing.www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
I haven’t seen that revue, David, but I did go over and take a look at it. It really does not surprise me as much as it confirms the fact that the lens is as sharp as anyone that has used or owns it has been saying. It is just one of those lenses that is sharper than able to describe. 🙂
On the same note, seems that I am a bit outdated on some of the new lens releases by Nikon, never had been one that purchases on a release though. The 80-400 has been updated and has those features that I mentioned earlier. Upgraded the VR took off the aperture ring and changed the focus mechanism, as well as added that Nano coating. I still like mine better but I have learned its character and love the quick manual override focus ring. Both lenses do require a bit of an adjustment and character learning phase but once you get accustomed to the character of the lens, it is fantastic, for the focal range. I decided to also read some of the new reviews on it, as well, and found most lacking applicational comparison and real world results. If you skim down to the comments, form owners of the lens, you will find that they disagree with a lot of the reviewers comments and state the the lens is much better than the actual review. Granted, they are both a bit softer at 400mm but that is expected with a range of 80-400 and still is not as bad as the reviewers may think. On top of this, any softness is easily fixed with the RAW converter.
Once you get your arsenal rebuilt, let me know so that I can’t start talking to you about the fantastic future of mirror less camera bodies … lol
Once you get your arsenal rebuilt, let me know so that I can’t start talking to you about the fantastic future of mirror less camera bodies … lol
I know I know I know….
Saw a guy at the cafe the other day with a Fuji in a classic leather case and was thinking I needed one..lol
The update of the Sony full frame mirror-less without AA filter is also VERY interesting.About 100 years ago I was shooting Alice Cooper and did a side roll of cross process on a little Konica Hexar with a fixed 35 f2 lens and one of the shots ended up being a big fold-out poster in a Metal mag – the image quality was amazing.
I can see the 24mp Sony being that sort of camera.www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
This might hurt a bit but I am going to have to toss it at ya.. lol That Fuji is INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!!! It has a fixed focal length, 35mm equivalent, and everything in that camera is calibrated to maximize the image quality at that focal length. The Dynamic Range is astonishing, the built in 2 stop ND filter works fantastic, the reflective meter is spot on, at 18%, and evaluates the scene with incredibly accuracy. The camera is built to drop your jaw with every shot and due to the entire camera being calibrated to a fixed focal length, I just do not see how Sony could really compare, in IQ. Have to admit that the old fashion photojournalist look is pretty awesome too but I don’t think an AD would like us showing up on set to shoot with it, where size seems to matter. I can’t help but feel that mirror less will eventually make the DSLR’s obsolete and may not be to far off in the near future.
Leica has been manufacturing mirror less for years but for some odd reason, that has got to be the most overlooked and often forgotten about “leading manufacturer” for high end gear. I am thinking strongly about going over to Leica but would still have to stay with my Nikons for hotshoe work, that and Hass rentals.. lol
That had to be cool, shooting Alice Cooper, I mean photographing him.. lol Dead Babies and all… lol
Ben, just downloaded a studio sample shot from the Fuji from dpreview and it’s a cracker !
Bugger, now I want one…lolI can tell you why a lot of photographers overlooked leica – they’re a pain to use IMHO.
I tried one years ago and came to the conclusion that removing the base plate to change film was going to slow me down.
That said, the lenses were wicked.Another mirror less worth looking at if feeling nostalgic is the Maymiya 6 rangefinder.
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.