@ sevencrossing

Thank you.

Squamish Photo said:

Since you're looking to replace a dedicated portrait lens ......

I have started a dedicated thread on Portrait lens

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=11347#post-119185

@ SquamishPhoto.... your comments on the 105mm f/2.8VR Nikkor macro...lacks for portraits. I do have the 135mm f/2 which is just a breath taking lens IMO. And, i like my 85mm f/1.8 G. I am thinking you have the 100mm f/2, Distagon and are you saying this is similar to the 135mm f/2 in its "special properties". Like the incredible sharpness? nice bokeh?

And, what do you see is lacking from the 105 f/2.8VR Nikkor Macro? I was considering this for both macro and portraits, but respect your opinion. The Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2 ZF.2, is this the one you called the 105 and recommend for portraits?

I know the 135mm f/2 Nikkor is sharp wide open as a lot of my snapshots have shown. http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7990521147/sizes/o/in/photostream/

So, thanks for your input....

Since you're looking to replace a dedicated portrait lens like the 135mm f2L its no surprise that you were disappointed by the 105VR. I used to own one and would definitely say that its use as a portrait lens is far outweighed by its many other uses. Its primary function is obviously as a macro lens and there it performs admirably, but it lacks the distinctive characteristic found in lenses like the 135mm f2L, 135 f2 DC, any of the 85mm f1.4s available among a host of others. Personally, regardless of which system you're running I would strongly recommend the newly released Carl Zeiss 135 f2 or the already infamous 105mm f2 Makro. Both are some of the best portrait optics available for either system and are well worth any premium you might have to pay to acquire one.

@Drengist...Nikon have an F1.4 35mm and 50 F1.4 and F1.8. I really don't see any reason to get the Sigma...the Nikon versions are very good.

For portraits the 85 F1.8 is great...and the 105 F2.8 is awesome as well.

I really don't have anything bad to say about any current Nikon lens. Obviously the constant aperture lens are usually better performing, but even the variable aperture lenses are pretty good.

Hmm...sure you used the same 105 F2.8 I have? I use mine for all kinds of stuff including portraits and general telephoto use. It is a great sharp lens and one of Nikon's best. Here are a couple examples...

Drengist

The 50mm f 1.4 is a fine lens

for ultra wide, how about the 16mm f 2.8 fish eye; distortion can be corrected in Lightroom

As for portraiture, there is a lot of choice, have a look at the 105 f 2.8 macro

Sigma v Nikon You have just bought Nikon's top value for money Camera

if you stay with Nikon, you wil not be disappointed

Persoanlly, I would just get the 24 -120 f 4 zoom

Drengist said:
Hi there,

I am another Canon-User, that will buy a D600 and say good-bye to Canon. It was was long way to make that decision, but in the end there was no other choice.

I want a a light and small FF-body, so the 5DIII ist out of the game. I tried it a few days ago, its great, but big and heavy, too. Thats a deal breaker for me (beside the price!).

And the 6D isn't worth 2k. I thought it over and over again, but there are certain things, that really annoy me. Viewfinder, Cardslot, and the AF.

Even though the camera isn't out yet, the IQ can't be much better than the IQ of the D600. I read so many reviews, saying the D600 is on par with the 5DIII...

Now I need some advice on lenses.

First of all I want a standard prime: Either the Nikkor 50 1.4 or the annouced Sigma 35mmm. Sigma says, it will be avaible in November.

Next thing wil be a Ultrawidelense, comparable to the Tokina 11-16 for Crop. Any suggestions? (price cap is 800 Euros)

And finally a portrait lense at 85-100mm (600 Euros)

Thanks for any good advice,

D.

the problem with the 105 is you need to switch it to 3m-infinity for portraits or it is slow as hell to focus and frequently miss focuses. if i could swap mine for the 85 1.4 id do it in a heartbeat, i dont shoot macro and just sold my RRS rail.

the grip issue seems funny, but most likely your hand is too big for the D600 body, the D800 may not have this problem for you.

The 135 f/2 is highly regarded, but nikon patented a 135 1.8 with VR a while back, and it might be worth waiting (possibly a very long time) for this to show up.

Tom Have you considered the 70 -120 f 2.8
Yes its heavy, yes its expensive, and yes its one Nikon's top lenses

if you find the focusing slow on the 105 macro, i think that may be fault of the D600 it's blistering fast on the D800

The finger pain. This protrusion is supposed to be there to create pressure on the top of the middle finder which keeps the camera upright. The heavier the lens the greater the pressure. I would think all Nikon bodies would use the same inner shape of that curve which rests on the middle finger. I haven't heard anyone else complain about it. You must have a sensitive nerve in this area. Let me suggest putting a band aid on the finger which experiences the pain to see if it distributes the pressure across a wider area of the finger. Simple temporary fix. If that doesn't work look for something harder to tape or wrap around the finger to distribute the pressure to a larger area of the finger. If that solves the problem it is a matter of too much pressure on one point of your finger. Perhaps your finger will adjust to the pressure or perhaps the ergonomics just don't work for your hand.

@ tomklepl I recently shot an auto auction with the 135mm f/2.0 Nikkor....

Look at this set on Flickr, the ones at Goeman's Auction... see what you think. Start here and press "next" to see a dozen or so...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7990517637/in/set-72157631519930021/lightbox/

Even wide open this is a very nice lens, yes, somewhat older than most, but I love it.

@tomklepl As msmoto stated, welcome to NRF. Congrats on your new camera gear. You are on the right path for sure....well done!

Now with respect to the 105 2.8 Micro I think you really need to play with this lens a bit more. It is without question one of the most sharpest lens within the Nikon line of pro-glass. I own this lens and has served me very very well. It focuses very fast for me in AF-S mode...I have not used it for action shot (the 70-200 2.8 is for that); hence, AF-C. My main usage of this lens is for portrait (n conjunction to my 85 1.8G & 24-70 2.8) and macro photography. If possible try to rent it for a while and play with it for a while.

With respect to weight and balancing the body, I highly recommend getting the additional battery grip for your D600. I have one on my D7000 and it truly makes the feel and operating the camera that much more joyful. As you know, the D600 & D7000 body are very much alike.

Enjoy your new gear and by all mean begin posting your images on our site. The best way in doing this is by getting yourself a Flickr account. Let us know if you need help in doing this. Happy shooting...Tom

Cheers...

Hello again!

Update: I've got my D600 and lenses! I ended up with the following:

16-35/4VR - Great edge to edge sharpness. Better image quality than the 17-40. Dang this thing is front heavy though - compounded by the grip problem (see below) it could be a bit of a pain to use.

24-120/4VR - Also great sharpness across the frame and very speedy focus. I was initially on the fence about this one, but it surpassed my expectations. This appears to be THE walkaround lens for Nikon FX. If only Nikon could produce this at the same weight with f/2.8. :)

50mm/1.8G - great value, how could I not buy it? The guy at the store recommended it over the 1.4G as have many reviewers online. I didn't try the 1.4 but quality and price of the 1.8 were right for me. Also, focus speed is slower than the zooms above and takes a little patience, so I don't think I could deal with a slower focusing lens. I also love the light weight -- it balances perfectly with the D600 body. Makes me want more primes.

I went in thinking I'd get the 105 micro but after testing it, I determined that it's truly an amazing, sharp macro lens but nothing more than that. AF-C was too slow for action portraits and images were noticeably softer for more distant subjects. It IS a macro lens after all, so I wasn't totally surprised, but I was hoping for more. I may add the macro to my kit later. I will very much miss my Canon 135/2 so I may go try out Nikon's 135/2 when it's in stock. I wish Nikon's version was a little more up to date, but maybe it doesn't matter?

My initial impressions of the new Nikon setup are overall very good. Performance and image quality are great -- these are the reasons I switched from Canon. I love the natural, film-like look of the Nikon images, even at high ISOs. AF-C is reliable outdoors, as is AF-S in low light. I like the compact form factor and the very handy popup flash (Canon really goofed by not including one on the 6D). I also appreciate small things like the LCD screen cover. Expectations met!

I was curious to evaluate the reported green cast of the LCD. I compared a picture of a white wall on the camera vs my calibrated NEC display. There may be a very, very slight greenish yellow cast but it is really very minor and is a non-issue. I also noticed that colours on the LCD appear more saturated than they really are when the LCD is set for maximum brightness (the default). Changing the setting to 'Auto' seems to be a good remedy.

The pain points for me revolve mostly around ergonomics and are mostly a result of my being used to the arguably more intuitive Canon interface. Except ONE thing - the red swoosh under the shutter button protrudes at such an angle and sharpness that it digs into the side of my middle finger in a truly painful way. It's even worse with a heavy lens. I didn't notice this in the store but after 10-15 minutes of post-purchase shooting I really felt the pain. I have no idea how this design problem made it to production - rather worrisome really! Do other Nikon cameras (such as the D800) have the same grip shape? Maybe I'll build up a callus there and it won't be an issue...

Tom

ps. Is it possible to post images into the forum?

Thanks a lot for the quick feedback folks! I am going to go back and review now.

@ tomklepl

Welcome to NRF.

The 24-120mm f/4.0 VR, 16-35mm f/4.0 VR, are very nice and I have both. An alternative, to the 24-120 is the 24-70mm f/2.8, possibly a bit sharper but no VR. I have an 85mm f/1.8G which is excellent for a prime, and the 135mm f/2.0 Nikkor is an incredibly sharp lens. I have a 50mm f/1.4, but would rather have a 35mm f/1.4. Here is a macro with the 85mm f/1.8 G Nikkor

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7817634224/sizes/l/in/set-72157631170271000/

Let us know what you decide and please post on Photo-A-Day....

Your lens choices look pretty good as far as I can tell. The 105 is a great lens and works well as a dual purpose for portraits and macro...VR makes it that much more versatile over the older macros I think. If you get the F1.8 lenses you can get the 28 F1.8G, 50 F1.8G and 85 F1.8G for the price of say the 35 F1.4. Just a thought.

Welcome to the forum tomklepl! I think you might find the answer to your questions in one of these similar threads?

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5707

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3702

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=4541

If after reading them you still have questions, add them to one of these threads, so future "Canon defectors" :-) will be more readily able to find and benefit from the answers. Once more, welcome! In the words or orphan Annie, "I think you're gonna like it here".

Hi all,

This is my first post to the forum.

I've been using Canon equipment for about 6 years (started with a 30D, then a 5D Mark II which I sold last year due to disappointing performance). I shoot mainly travel style photography - landscapes, architecture and portraits. I occasionally shoot an event such as a wedding (not professionally).

I am on the verge of buying a Nikon D600 since it looks like the perfect travel camera for me. Part of me is also considering the 5D Mark III but the compactness, dynamic range and included pop-up flash of the D600 makes me want to switch.

I used the following Canon lenses with the 5D Mark II:

24-105/4.0L (used often)
17-40/4.0L (used often)
135/2.0L (used often)
24/1.4L (rarely used)

Now, moving to Nikon, I want to know which lenses are the top choices for my intended uses? I'm not necessarily trying to find the exact equivalent lenses in Nikon, since I realize that Nikon has its own unique strengths.

My current proposed selection is as follows:

24-120/4.0VR (To replace the Canon 24-105)
16-35/4.0VR (To replace the Canon 17-40)
105 Micro (I want to try my hand at macro, and use this for portraits in place of the Canon 135/2.0)
50/1.4G or 50/1.8G (for indoor and low light)

I'm also considering the following substitutions but need some advice:

135/2 instead of the macro (looks kind of old and heavy though)
An 85mm prime instead of the macro (maybe not long enough for street portraits though)
A 35mm prime instead of the 50

Thoughts?