Converting - Canon to Nikon (Lens/ Flash ?'s)

[ACrossley]

Hi friends,
After much research, recommendations and hands-on experience, I have decided to convert. I sold all of my equipment over the past week and am preparing to order in the next day. I know a couple of the lenses that I want and will order outright, but Nikon is new to me and despite reading literature on the various lenses and experimenting with friend's gear, I still have a couple of questions.

1. WHAT I'VE DECIDED and WHAT I NEED TO KNOW:
I am purchasing the d700 and 70-200 VR II lens outright. I shoot mainly family/ children sessions but have several weddings booked this year. I know the 70-200mm is a FANTASTIC lens and have been fortunate to play around with it on the d700 ... really love it. I will also add a traditional 50mm 1.4 to begin with .... not sure if I should go with the 1.4G or 1.4D????

2. I would like to add a third lens. My favorite lens previously was my 85mm 1.8. I know this is covered with the 70-200mm, but I love the quality of primes. I was shooting on cropped sensor, though, so I am not sure if I would love it as much on the full sensor ... any experience with this one????
I am also considering the 17-55mm and new 24mm 1.4 for this third option.

I have yet to look at the flashes ... recommendations are appreciated.
Please let me know if you need any more info!
Thanks a ton!

 

[JimmyO]

Sounds like money isnt an issue so go with the 50mm 1.4G.

I love my 85mm 1.8 but if you want that look on your d700 look at the 105mm or 135mm f/2's There amazing portrait lenses.

 

[ACrossley]

Thanks JimmyO,
Not that money just flows around here, but all gear has been sold and I am at a point where I am ready to INVEST further. I am going all in!

I thought I would need the 105mm ... I know the 85mm on my cropped body was closer to that. Not sure about f/2 instead of f/1.4 though ... do you think it's worth it even having the 70-200?

 

[JimmyO]

Completly worth having the 70-200mm. Although slower and bigger if your shooting weddings your gonna need the flexibility of the zoom

If your shooting mainly weddings though consider a midrange 2.8 zoom before a long prime. Dont get the 17-55, its DX only so it will work on your camera but it will go into DX crop mode which lowers resolution and is completly dumb. Id look at either the 24-70 2.8 or the 28-70mm 2.8. If you want even wider there are 2.8 zooms there too.

 

[ACrossley]

JimmyO -
Oh, yes - total go on the 70-200!!! No doubt! I meant is it worth the 85mm, too (in addtion to the 70-200) since it is covered in this reange? I realize the advantage of the prime/ low f/stop on the 85mm, but is it a $1200 advantage?

I did not realize the 17-55 was DX ... I know the big difference already between FX and DX from reading up on lenses. A fellow friend recommended the lens ... thought she would have mentioned this!

Thanks for the other suggestions. You've been a major help!

 

[JimmyO]

As for if long prime is worth it is totally up to you. I own an 85mm 1.8 and a 50-135 2.8 (70-200mm equivalent for DX). They each have their use. I take the 85 when i know i can comtrol my distance to the subject and if i really wanna throw the background out of focus, also this lens helps alot in low light. If im shooting something like a ceremoney or sports the zoom is very nice becuase you can zoom out and get a group shot really quick then go zoom in for a candid head shot.

As for flash the SB-900 is top of the line. Its a shame they discontinued the sb-800 becuase it was basically a smaller 900 without the gimics and for cheaper, but now with prices rising it just makes sense to go with the 900. The 600 is great too but for on camera use only as it doesnt have a PC jack for wireless triggers

 

[ACrossley]

Thanks again - great info. I really like the DOF my 85mm gave me on my cropped body and would like to have that on the full frame potentially with the 105mm.

Have lots to order tomorrow! Still a little undecided ... I would like to order some lenses/ accessories second hand but have to resume shooting. I think I could get by with my 50mm and 70-200mm until I make the next lens choice.

 

[JimmyO]

Yeah definetly give yourself enough time to really about what your buying first. Ive bought tons of gear used. If your on the fence about a $1000+ lens i would most definetly consider renting it for a few days first.

 

[KmH]

Welcome, to the dark side! :thumbup:

I'm curious though, we know where you've wound up gear wise, but not the gear you recently abandoned.

It could be informative to others contemplating a similar wholesale swap.

Such as, if you sold a 5D MKII and an EF-70-200 mm f/2.8, etc, etc or if the switch to Nikon also entailed a significant upgrade in your gear.

 

[djacobox372]

Keep in mind that the dof of the 105mm f2 on a full-frame camera is actually tighter then the 85mm f1.4 on a crop sensor camera--providing the same shooting distance.

 

[djacobox372]

Thanks again - great info. I really like the DOF my 85mm gave me on my cropped body and would like to have that on the full frame potentially with the 105mm.

Have lots to order tomorrow! Still a little undecided ... I would like to order some lenses/ accessories second hand but have to resume shooting. I think I could get by with my 50mm and 70-200mm until I make the next lens choice.

105mm f2.8 will give you the same dof as a 85mm f1.8

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Definitely go with the 50mm f/1.4G, i have it, i love it, it's a perfect fit with a D700 if anything because of the handling.

If you can swing it, get the 24 f/1.4 too, i'm going to try and get it, i've always wanted a fast 24mm. I'm sure it's a great lens.

Nikon's 85mm f/1.8 is also really nice for the price. It's ridiculously sharp when stopped down.

the 105 f/2DC is also really nice as a formal portrait lens.


If I were to buy into the nikon system to shoot mainly portraits i'd do this:

24mm f/1.4, for the photojournalist look.

50mm f/1.4, for the full body shots, and when i'd want heads to look a little big.

85mm f/1.8, just because it's a really nice lens, cheap, and can work as a head/shoulders lens in a pinch.

105VR, my preferred range for head/shoulders, doubles as a macro lens, and has VR so it's easier to compose with.


That should be able to give you a pretty good range of options and will definitely give you a great look to your pictures.

 

[ACrossley]

Sw1thchFX
Thank you for this great, EXTENSIVE list!
I am trying to narrow it down to three lenses to purchase outright, but this is great information for future purchases. I have decided on the 70-200 without a doubt. What other two would you recommend from this list as MOST valuable?

KmH -
This is a significant upgrade for me. I am coming from the Canon 40D with primary (favorite) lenses being 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 and 17-40mm. I am/ was at a point to upgrade - I did not see the point in another "step" before getting the gear I ultimately wanted. Make sense?

 

[Mike_E]

If you are going to shoot weddings you really need to cover the wide angles too (I mention a zoom here because there is usually a chair with a future mother-in-law or a pew right where you need to be). If the new 24-70mm is too steep at this point you should look for a non-VR version.

As far portraits go have a look at the 105mm f2.0 DC.

 

[gsgary]

What is your second body if you are shooting weddings ?