Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Canon to Nikon transition questions


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1
Former_Canon_Fanboy

Former_Canon_Fanboy

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

Hi there, I am in the process of selling my Canon gear to switch to Nikon.  My Canon gear is as follows:

 

Canon 7d

Canon 24-105 F4L

Canon 50 1.4

Battery grip

YN560 flash

 

Looking to sell all of the above for the Nikon D750.  Just have some questions about the prime and telephoto lens that I have yet to be decided on.  

 

What lenses would you recommend for a prime?  The optics must be comparable to Canon's L series, so I am looking at the 50mm 1.4 and 1.2.

 

What telephoto would you recommend as a replacement to my previous Canon 24-105 F4L?

 

18-300?
28-300?
18-200?
24-85?
 
I like the reach of the 18-300 but not sure about the  optics.  Sorry for the noob questions.  I am so used to Canon and recently made the decision to switch,


#2
Russ

Russ

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Country Flag

I can only say that the 24-120/f4 I have read good things about.



#3
Jerry_

Jerry_

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,524 posts
  • Country Flag
Agree with Russ that the 24-120/4 is an allrounder that performs well.

Also the 50/1.4 looks to make a good match to your current Canon lens.

If you have little restrictions on your budget and are willed to take the extra weight, you might later on also look for the 70-210/2.8

#4
Former_Canon_Fanboy

Former_Canon_Fanboy

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag
Aside from the wider aperture, how does the 24-120 compare to the 28-300? I like the long range of that lens.

#5
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,589 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 24-120 is equal to the 24-105. The 28-300 is a good consumer superzoom, but the long range means compromises. It is not as sharp as in the middle over ~150 mm and below ~32.

The nearest equivalent to your 50/1.4 on Aps-c is probably the 85/1.8G or 1.4G on FX. Remember that the D750 is full-frame, so a 50 is more like a 35 on the 7D

The 18-xxx zooms are DX lenses, Aps-c in canonspeak, so not a good match for the D750.

The 70-200 pro zooms are equal to, or better than their L counterparts in the Canon line-up.



#6
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

I was thinking the 24-120 f4 as well.  I really liked that as a general carry lens for myself although I eventually ended up selling it to get the 24-70 f2.8 as I needed a low light wide angle zoom for most of my photography.  The 70-200 f2.8 is probably my favorite lens and I'd probably put it's quality up against any zoom out there in that range - and probably against a good number of primes in that range as well.



#7
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

If you need the best optical performance for your normal (50ish) lens, you may want to take a look at Nikon's new 58mm f/1.4. It's rather expensive though. If you need the same angle of view as what you have with your Canon 50mm on the 7D then the 85mm f/1.4 is probably the best choice. Again, a fairly expensive lens. I use the 85mm f/1.8 myself and aside from the non rounded aperture blades, I love it. 

 

--Ron



#8
Kenafein

Kenafein

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Country Flag

The best 50mm is the new Sigma 50mm/1.4 ART lens, but the Nikkor 50/1.4 AFS is no slouch.  Don't use the 18-300, that's a DX lens.  The 24-84 is a good cheap lens.  The 24-120 is nice(a bit expensive), and the 28-300VR is surprisingly well received.  I don't think you'll go wrong with any of those.



#9
B Grace

B Grace

    Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Country Flag

I use the 24-85 VR on my D600 with good results.  I'd say that based on my work with correcting distortion in shots having strong vertical lines the lens is probably priced correctly.  I think it's sharp though and it's not terribly heavy in the camera pack.

 

My guess would be the high ISO capabilities of the D750 would make the 24-120/4 a great alternative to the 24-70/2.8.  The difference in wide-open DOF isn't going to be all that noticeable.  A person would have to view sample images online to pick which lens produces images he/she finds the most pleasing.



#10
akanarya

akanarya

    Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationTurkey, Çankırı

What about sigma 24-105/4?



#11
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,652 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

 

My guess would be the high ISO capabilities of the D750 would make the 24-120/4 a great alternative to the 24-70/2.8.  The difference in wide-open DOF isn't going to be all that noticeable.  A person would have to view sample images online to pick which lens produces images he/she finds the most pleasing.

 

Having had both lenses and doing quite a bit of shooting in seriously low light, I think you are probably correct.  The 24-70 is definitely a better lens, but I was quite pleased over all with the quality of the 24-140 images.  Typically I used both of these lenses on a second body for times when I needed a wider view on the sidelines of games or crowd shots.  While it might not seem like it when attending a game (especially high school games), the sidelines (and especially the stands) are no where as well lit as the poorly lit field!  I really had to push the ISO to get the images and really had to crank down the shutter speed if I wanted any DOF.  Most folks don't have to deal with lighting that is that bad in their normal photography which is why I believe you are probably correct.  But, there are some images where the 24-70 will prove its value.  Both are great lenses and at some point I might just grab a 24-120 again as I think it is a great walk around lens for most situations.



#12
Former_Canon_Fanboy

Former_Canon_Fanboy

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag
Thanks for the advice. I am aiming for the 24-120 f4 and the 50 f1.4.