# Nikon Users



## CNCO (Apr 8, 2010)

Just a quick question for nikon photographers, what lenses are you guys / gals using? I see canon offers lenses around 87mm but nikon does not. Are those lenses that much better? Durring a sport event I see photographers with the huge grey canon lenses just wondering what nikon offers in comparison.


----------



## LBPhotog (Apr 8, 2010)

Nikon has two 85 mm lens one is a f/1.4 and I think the other one is a f/1.8

For just about every GREY Canon lens there is a BLACK Nikon lens that's equal to it ... 

C'mon man, once you go Black, you never look back!


----------



## CNCO (Apr 8, 2010)

Is the quality that good? My best lenses is a 50mm f/ 1.8. I also enjoy my 18-135 f/3.5. I just to take pics and say wow.


----------



## CNCO (Apr 8, 2010)

Let me be clear with a 85mm filter size not focal length.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Apr 8, 2010)

Can I get an Amen? And by Amen, I mean a this is completely in the wrong section.


----------



## Fedaykin (Apr 9, 2010)

GeneralBenson said:


> Can I get an Amen? And by Amen, I mean a this is completely in the wrong section.



Whoa, so right. what is this doing here?


----------



## Christie Photo (Apr 9, 2010)

It's no feat to find what Nikkor lenses are available.

Good luck.

-Pete


----------



## CNCO (Apr 10, 2010)

didnt mean to bother you, anywhere else i ask i dont get any feedback. no one is making you answer to this topic.


----------



## KmH (Apr 10, 2010)

CNCO said:


> didnt mean to bother you, anywhere else i ask i dont get any feedback. no one is making you answer to this topic.





> Durring a sport event I see photographers with the huge grey canon lenses just wondering what nikon offers in comparison


Huge black Nikon lenses:

Nikon | AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR Autofocus Lens | 2171

Plus the $500 lens hood,

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520640-USA/Nikon_4933_HK_33_Lens_Hood_for.html

Nikon | Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR Autofocus | 2173

Plus the lens hood of course (add $550)

Nikon | HK-35 Lens Hood for AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR | 4937

I use a Sigma APO 150-500 mm DG HSM for regional sports. It's black too:


----------



## Fedaykin (Apr 11, 2010)

KmH said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> > didnt mean to bother you, anywhere else i ask i dont get any feedback. no one is making you answer to this topic.
> ...



Holy hell, that is one big ass RPG. Envious.


----------



## Mike_E (Apr 11, 2010)

The IFF chip is extra.  :/


----------



## djacobox372 (Apr 12, 2010)

One thing nikon has over canon... 40+ years of lens compatibility.  If you can't afford the $10000 modern 600mm f4 afs lens, then you can always opt for a $3000 manual focus 600mm f4 lens with optics that are of equal quality.


----------



## Phranquey (Apr 12, 2010)

djacobox372 said:


> One thing nikon has over canon... 40+ years of lens compatibility. If you can't afford the $10000 modern 600mm f4 afs lens, then you can always opt for a $3000 manual focus 600mm f4 lens with optics that are of equal quality.


 
:thumbup:

Picked up a 500 f/4P last year.  It is a "chipped" lens that still allows it to work in all metering & exposure modes... just manual focus.


----------



## djacobox372 (Apr 13, 2010)

Phranquey said:


> djacobox372 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing nikon has over canon... 40+ years of lens compatibility. If you can't afford the $10000 modern 600mm f4 afs lens, then you can always opt for a $3000 manual focus 600mm f4 lens with optics that are of equal quality.
> ...



Awesome lens... looks almost identical to my 600mm f5.6; I often wish I would have opted for the 500mm, it's a bit faster and sells for about the same $$.


----------



## Overread (Apr 13, 2010)

Phranquey said:


> djacobox372 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing nikon has over canon... 40+ years of lens compatibility. If you can't afford the $10000 modern 600mm f4 afs lens, then you can always opt for a $3000 manual focus 600mm f4 lens with optics that are of equal quality.
> ...



Bah thats nothing! 
Canon are the only ones to make a real macro lens:





the Canon MPE65mm f2.8 macro lens





to give you some idea that thing is about 2mm long at the most! 

Ok to say that is probably the most rarly used of the whole canon line of lenses under several £/$1000 and that its about the hardest lens to ever learn to use (let alone use well) means that for most its really not a factor.

And there are other options for highmagnification out there for other brands - but still - Canon make it which makes canon better


----------



## Formatted (Apr 13, 2010)

> Canon are the only ones to make a real macro lens:



Overread the topic name is "Nikon Users" 

If your gonna buy a 600mm you are probably using it for sports or wildlife! So its great that you can manual focus at skiers going at 75 mph or a Osprey going at 60 mph! Thats fantastic wanna teach me?

If you are going to spend $4000 on a lens then you may as well dish out a-bit more for the AF-S version


----------



## benhasajeep (Apr 14, 2010)

CNCO said:


> Let me be clear with a 85mm filter size not focal length.


 
Why would filter size be important?  It is a possible indication of the largest lens element used in a lens.  But it has no bearing on the quality of the lens.  Yes faster lenses let in more light, so naturally they will need a larger front element / larger filter.  But going by filter size is no indication of a lens performance.  Matter of fact most fast big lenses or very wide lenses use a rear filter that is fairly small.  The front element is so large it was easier and less expensive to use a rear filter.


----------



## Overread (Apr 14, 2010)

Formatted said:


> > Canon are the only ones to make a real macro lens:
> 
> 
> 
> Overread the topic name is "Nikon Users"



Yah I know, but Iwanted to point out that nikons can do everything with their lens range that any other company can barring high magnification macro (and that for most highmagnification macro is not a limit)



Formatted said:


> If your gonna buy a 600mm you are probably using it for sports or wildlife! So its great that you can manual focus at skiers going at 75 mph or a Osprey going at 60 mph! Thats fantastic wanna teach me?
> 
> If you are going to spend $4000 on a lens then you may as well dish out a-bit more for the AF-S version




This is a valid point to consider not only for the AF speed factor, but also because older MF camera bodies were easie to focus on manualy than most DSRLs. The viewfinder images were bigger and the viewfinder would have focusing aids built in - many DSLRs (esp entry level ones) have far smaller viewfinders and no focusing aids at all - they are made with AF being the dominant focusing method in mind. 



benhasajeep said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> > Let me be clear with a 85mm filter size not focal length.
> ...



I'm also confused on this point as well and was going to mention it last night (but forgot to do so). Filter size is not what you want to be going on, heck if you want larger filters Sigma lenses tend to have larger filter sizes than most canon or nikon lenses. It won't tell you the quality of the lens at all


----------



## Phranquey (Apr 14, 2010)

Formatted said:


> If you are going to spend $4000 on a lens then you may as well dish out a-bit more for the AF-S version


 
Are you going to dish out that _bit_ more for me.... ??

I paid $2200 for my 500 f/4P. The AF-S version tends to go for $5000+ in VG condition, and I want nothing to do with the AF-I version. 
I will have one eventually, but for now mine does plenty fine.... It's far better than the one I didn't have.


----------



## Formatted (Apr 15, 2010)

There is a amazing deal in the UK for a 600mm f/4 AF-S £4890 INC VAT. Mental!


----------



## christenajenifer (Apr 15, 2010)

I am using  Nikon AF 135mm f/2 DC.Nikon AF 135mm f/2 DC is Nikon's, and arguably the world's, greatest portrait lens. It has a very similar smaller brother, the 105mm f/2 DC.

The 135mm DC is also Nikon's sharpest 135mm lens, and an extraordinarily great lens for nature and landscape photography


----------

