# Nikons equivalent to canons l series glass?



## gumball513 (Aug 5, 2009)

So, im pretty familiar with canons lenses and whatnot but nikon is a different story. What is nikons equivalent or "rival" to canons l series?


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 5, 2009)

Hmmm... The expensive ones. 

I think they all have a yellow/gold band around the front of the lens though.


----------



## KmH (Aug 5, 2009)

gumball513 said:


> So, im pretty familiar with canons lenses and whatnot but nikon is a different story. What is nikons equivalent or "rival" to canons l series?


 Nikon doesn't stoop to such banal marketing ploys.


----------



## Jaq (Aug 5, 2009)

They tend to have a 2.8 after the f


----------



## musicaleCA (Aug 5, 2009)

KmH said:


> gumball513 said:
> 
> 
> > So, im pretty familiar with canons lenses and whatnot but nikon is a different story. What is nikons equivalent or "rival" to canons l series?
> ...



How right you are.

But red is my favourite colour. I will always be biased toward L glass.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 5, 2009)

Nikon doesn't feel the need to convince people that their more-expensive lenses are capable of professional use. I remember back when Canon invented the L- series  marketing gimmick; that was back when Nikon had not yet begun to make much in the way of consumer lenses,and when pretty much any lens with the name Nikkor on it was good enough for professional or serious use.

Today, many of the better Nikkor lenses have ED glass, which is what the gold ring around the lens barrel originally signified. There's a fairly simple way to discern Nikon's premium lenses from the consumer-level lenses: specifications,and price. For example, the 85mm f/1.8 AF-D is the enthusiast's 85mm lens, while the 85mm 1.4 AF-D is the professional model. The 50mm 1.4 AF-S is the pro-level 50, while the $119 50mm 1.8 AF-D is the hobbyist's obvious option. All of the Micro-Nikkor's would be considered L-level if they were Canon. I think all of Nikon's f/2.8 zooms would be considered L-series if they were Canon. All of the Nikon $1000+ prime lenses like 85 1.4,105 DC,135DC,180 ED,200 f/2, and 300 f/4 and 300 f/2.8, plus all 400,500,600 teles would be classed as L-series. Same with all of the Nikon Tilt/Shift lenses.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 6, 2009)

KmH said:


> gumball513 said:
> 
> 
> > So, im pretty familiar with canons lenses and whatnot but nikon is a different story. What is nikons equivalent or "rival" to canons l series?
> ...





Derrel said:


> Nikon doesn't feel the need to convince people that their more-expensive lenses are capable of professional use.



Is this why there's a bright gold and very obvious golden ring around only their professional glass?

Nikons L series equivalent are the Gold Ring lenses. However this was introduced mid 90s I think so some professional glass out there still in common rotation and still being sold (85mm f/1.4 or the 80-200 f/2.8 AF) have no gold ring. Certainly all the new ones do. Don't confuse not stooping to such marketing ploys with just being late to brand products which have a very very long life cycle.

My kit lenses have ED glass. If this is what the original gold ring signified then they dropped it for that purpose a long time ago. The gold ring definitely signifies their Pro glass these days.


----------



## KmH (Aug 6, 2009)

Garbz said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > gumball513 said:
> ...


:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## table1349 (Aug 6, 2009)

KmH said:


> gumball513 said:
> 
> 
> > So, im pretty familiar with canons lenses and whatnot but nikon is a different story. What is nikons equivalent or "rival" to canons l series?
> ...



Canon owners don't have to ask such questions as this.  We already know the differences.   :lmao:


----------



## Garbz (Aug 7, 2009)

Yep they have a red ring to make it idiot proof. Nikon users need to know what an aperture is before they qualify


----------



## table1349 (Aug 7, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Yep they have a red ring to make it idiot proof. Nikon users need to know what an aperture is before they qualify



Whooo...................... I didn't know Nikonian's could read, much less understand math.     :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## AlexColeman (Aug 7, 2009)

We can read the writing on the wall. Canon is dead, THE KING IS DEAD, LONG LIVE NIKON!

:end rant:

I think there is no one such term or designation, allot of the 2.8, the good primes, anything over $1,000, et al.


----------



## table1349 (Aug 7, 2009)

AlexColeman said:


> We can read the writing on the wall. Canon is dead, THE KING IS DEAD, LONG LIVE NIKON!
> 
> :end rant:
> 
> I think there is no one such term or designation, allot of the 2.8, the good primes, anything over $1,000, et al.



You sure you didn't hit your head on the wall when you were reading it??  Sounds like a concussion to me.:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Derrel (Aug 7, 2009)

Garbz wrote:" Is this why there's a bright gold and very obvious golden ring around only their professional glass? Nikons L series equivalent are the Gold Ring lenses. However this was introduced mid 90s I think so some professional glass out there still in common rotation and still being sold (85mm f/1.4 or the 80-200 f/2.8 AF) have no gold ring. Certainly all the new ones do. Don't confuse not stooping to such marketing ploys with just being late to brand products which have a very very long life cycle."

Sorry Garbz, but you're wrong about the gold ring. First off, it was not introduced in the "mid-1990's". Nikon introduced the gold ring on ED telephotos in 1975 with the 300 f/4.5 ED 600mm f/5.6ED, Nikkor 880mm f/8.0 ED, and 1200mm f/ 11 ED.
You're about twenty years too late my boy....the Nikkor 400mm f/3.5 ED-IF was premiered at the 1976 Montreal Olympics, with ED glass and...a gold ring. The 400mm f/3.5 was the world's fastest supertelephoto lens for some time, until Nikon introduced an f/2.8 version.The 400mm f/5.6 Nikkor also had a gold ring,even though it was not the professional-level model 400mm, but it had ED glass.

The AF-D Zoom Micro-NIKKOR 70-180mm f/4.5~5.6  did not have a gold ring.  One of the all-time best-ever professional-grade macro lenses was the 200mm f/4 ED-IF Micro-Nikkor--again, ED glass, but no gold ring The relatively pedestrian 70-300mm AF-D Nikkor has ED glass, but no gold ring. Nikon's current 180mm AF-D is an f/2.8 ED f/2.8 ED glass telephoto,and it has no gold ring. Nikon's 80-200 f/2.8 ED zooms in autofocus variants 1 and 2 and 3 had ED glass, but no gold rings,and ran from 1988 to 1998, and the 80-200 f/2.8 ED AF-S model had ED glass, but no gold ring during its run from 1996 to 2006.

Again, you're wrong about the gold ring as a signal or identifier for Nikon's "pro glass". Many of their professional-grade lenses,even current models, have no gold ring on them. Again, Nikon has long counted on its user base to understand what makes a professional lens--and it's far from being a simple marketing gimmick like putting a stripe around lens barrels. From 1988 to 2006, Nikon's 80-200mm f/2.8 zooms had NO gold ring, but were pro lenses. Same with their professional macro lenses.

Serious Nikon users know what professional lenses are; they do not need to be "told" what to consider a professional-grade lens...and this has been true for well over 20 years now.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 8, 2009)

Oh no doubt that people know. But what I am saying is while it looks your right and it may originally have been introduced for ED glass, since about mid-90s it has been the moniker of pro glass primarily.

Like the 4th variant of the 80-200 which shares everything in common with it's previous models except AF-S had a gold ring. Almost every pro lens since about the turn of the century shares this. But yeah ok you want to keep talking history I'll talk current products. Direct from Nikon's website (just a small snip):

DX:
Goldring and pro - AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED
no ring, not pro - AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR (5.3x)
goldring and pro - AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED (3.2x)
goldring and pro - AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED (2.0x)
no ring, not pro - AF-S DX NIKKOR 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED

Zoom:
no ring, not pro - AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF (3.5x)
goldring, and pro - AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED (2.9x)
goldring, and pro - AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED (2.1x)
no ring, not pro - AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF-ED (1.9x)
goldring, and pro - AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II (2.9x)
no ring, not pro - AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G (4.3x)

Wide Angle:
goldring, and pro - AF Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D ED
Every other lens in this category is a very old design.

Telephoto primes:
Every lens in this category produced post 1996 has a gold ring. They are all pro, all expensive.

Lenses that break the trend:
no ring, but pro, but also ed glass so what does it mean? Maybe at a mere $500 it doesn't qualify as being "pro" like the 105mm Macro lens which does have a ring: AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED (ok real users know this a BS argument but I'm trying to find reason in this madness).
same for the AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G at less than $500 it's definitely a lens you will find on most amateur cameras. 


So there you have it. Every pro lens in Nikon's current lineup, produced towards the late 90s has a gold ring around it except for two. And those two lenses on their website which were both released recently are cheap. Nice, but still cheap.

Read into it what you will. But the goldring definitely does not define exclusively ED glass anymore (which at the time was a sure sign that it was pro glass). If I see a Nikon camera with a Nikon lens with a gold ring on the front I certainly will continue thinking mmm pro lens.


----------

