Nikon D300, Lens advice.

I want to buy a Nikon D300 after making a comparison between D300 and 50D. but I'm quite uncomfortable with Nikon lenses. I think Canon L lenses seems to be better than Nikon(it's just a thought). I'm more into shooting macro, landscapes and portraits. btw I'm not looking to buy heavy lenses, I prefer a sharp/all around lens besides a 50mm f1.8 for low light situations. I still think about the 50D as an alternative if I didn't find any suitable Nikon lenses. any advice here?

Hi Smarty,

Out of curiosity, why did you choose the Nikon D300 over the Canon 50D?

Hi Colin,
1- because it has 51 AF points. while the 50D has 9.
2- from what I viewed I assumed that Nikon delivers sharper and better images than canon. I still might be wrong.
assuming one day I'll go full frame. I don't want to throw the lenses away if I chose another brand. that's why I'm quite confused about the brand I'm going to stick with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smarty

Hi Colin,
1- because it has 51 AF points. while the 50D has 9.
2- from what I viewed I assumed that Nikon delivers sharper and better images than canon. I still might be wrong.
assuming one day I'll go full frame. I don't want to throw the lenses away if I chose another brand. that's why I'm quite confused about the brand I'm going to stick with.

---

Are you meaning the Nikon D300 (obsolete) or the D300s?

For what it's worth, my Canon 1Ds3 has 45 AF points - and I typically use just 1 (usually the one in the centre). With regards to sharpness it's primarily determined by (a) good sharpening technique, and (b) lens optics (in that order in my opinion). It's the job of the lens to deliver the image - in focus - on the sensor, and in this regards, I seriously doubt that you'll see any difference between any of the major brands.

You WILL however find a lot of bias from people when it comes to one brand over the other (for some the brand is almost a religious experience) (in fact if you're ever a bit bored, try asking something like this on any photography site: "Hi - I'm new to photography, and I need help deciding if I should buy a Mac or a PC, a Canon or a Nikon, and should I use UV filters for protection" :) The truth is that there's a HUGE overlap in capability between many brands at the same price point.

The Canon 7D is your other option too.

oh, sorry. I meant the D300s

Hi Smarty,

Welcome to the CiC forums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smarty

1- because it has 51 AF points. while the 50D has 9.
2- from what I viewed I assumed that Nikon delivers sharper and better images than Canon.

---

The larger number of AF points will, if there is time, allow you to select one that is on your subject without having to focus and recompose, but will not normally* result in sharper pictures.

* the only exception I can imagine is better focus tracking (using multiple points) on a 'moving in the frame' subject like a bird or plane in flight, then, having (many) more points is liable to help.

But hey, I only have 11, so maybe I'm trying to kid myself ;)

EDIT: I do work in single focus point mode 99.9% of the time and I do use other than the centre one quite regularly, but to be honest, navigating around those 11 is quite enough for me.

Cheers,

Smarty, Although I love Nikon cameras and have owned around 8 of them by now, I have nothing particularly against Canon (of which I was a brief owner of a film body). Both of these companies produce quality photographic equipments and are unmatched till date. That said, Canon 50D was launched as a competitor to Nikon D300 and bit the dust rather badly in its assigned task. Nikon's reign in this segment has been uninterrupted since 2007 when D300 was launched. Only now with the introduction of the 7D Canon seems to have recovered parity with the competition. In fact, D300 was an ahead-of-its-times DSLR and its influence has been so overpowering that it's been given a second life by a minor upgrade in D300S. And it still holds its sway.

To your original query of lenses for the D300S:

1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.8
2. Nikkor 16-85mm 3.5-5.6 VR
3. Nikkor 85mm f/1.8
4. Nikkor 60mm Micro 2.8 ED

if on a tight budget;

or

1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 G
2. Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8
3. Nikkor 85mm f/1.4
5. Nikkor 105mm Micro f/2.8 ED VR

if funds are not a problem.

Hope it helps.

thanks for your advice Colin, Dave and uspandey.

The Canon 7D and the Nikon D300s are both great cameras. But the most important factor to consider is "hand hold-ability". I use both Canons and Nikons; people with larger hands tends to lean towards Canons while smaller hands leans towards Nikons. The optional vertical battery grips will increase comfort on both and balance with larger lenses.

Nikon do have their own line of commercial grade lenses, and are identified by the "Gold Ring" near the frontal element. Canon's commercial grade lenses are signified by a "Red Ring" or titled L lenses. Nikon never bothered with a title acronym:rolleyes:.

You can do the comparisons for both brands on their main websites. If you are on a tight budget for lenses, you can always buy your lenses second hand (ex. www.keh.com) or any large camera shop's used department.

It's true in photography that "you get what you paid for" and "good quality lenses are good investments". Many pro-sumer lenses are excellent performers in their class. Optically, commercial grade lenses out performs perform consumer grade models. Why? It's because they have a higher quality glass and optical coatings to control CA (chromatic aberrations) and sharpness.

Note primes have always been sharper in performance over zooms. Take Nikon and Canon's cheap 50 1.8 primes. Both are tac sharp besides despite their cheap (Canon really really cheap) build quality.

One of the advantages of using Nikon over Canon is "backwards technology"; it means that the D300s is compatible with older AI and AF-D (screw driver) mounts from the 1980's-present. Canon's old F mount lenses will not mount (unless using an adapter ring) but AF will not work; manual focus only. Only EF and current EF-S mounts will work on today's digital Canons. If you're one day planning on upgrading to larger sensors bodies; focus on Fx and EF mounts only.

Some of Nikon's older lenses are legendary in optics, and some discontinued lenses cost more than than their modern counterparts. The same can be said for certain Canon discontinued L lenses. I am not going to start a brand war, or give you my reasons why I own/use this brand over that. But I will tell you that it does has a lot to do with personal preferences to optics, focal lengths, and performance thru many years of use.

You can always rent bodies and lenses to try for a few weeks before deciding on which brand or system. Once you commit to a system, you're 100% committed. It's very costly to be switching back and forth:eek:. There is no right or wrong decision. A camera is a camera, and the best one is the one you shoot with in hand;). In the end it's all about personal preferences and budget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Are you meaning the Nikon D300 (obsolete) or the D300s?

For what it's worth, my Canon 1Ds3 has 45 AF points - and I typically use just 1 (usually the one in the centre). With regards to sharpness it's primarily determined by (a) good sharpening technique, and (b) lens optics (in that order in my opinion). It's the job of the lens to deliver the image - in focus - on the sensor, and in this regards, I seriously doubt that you'll see any difference between any of the major brands.

You WILL however find a lot of bias from people when it comes to one brand over the other (for some the brand is almost a religious experience) (in fact if you're ever a bit bored, try asking something like this on any photography site: "Hi - I'm new to photography, and I need help deciding if I should buy a Mac or a PC, a Canon or a Nikon, and should I use UV filters for protection" :) The truth is that there's a HUGE overlap in capability between many brands at the same price point.

The Canon 7D is your other option too.

---

I am a Nikon user, I've never handled a Canon camera and I suppose it has to be a good camera since it appears to be the official brand of major league sports. My only dislike of the camera would be the white color of its telephoto lenses. This would be very distracting if used for wildlife photography, with the potential glare in a floral setting. I read a few books on photography and some Canon users also complained about the color of the lenses and some have used dark tape to cover up the out of place white color of the lens. I guess if you plan to use the lens for sports, landscape, and macro photography lens color will not be an issue. Let the subject matter you plan to photograph guide you towards the equipment you purchase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowman

I am a Nikon user, I've never handled a Canon camera and I suppose it has to be a good camera since it appears to be the official brand of major league sports. My only dislike of the camera would be the white color of its telephoto lenses. This would be very distracting if used for wildlife photography, with the potential glare in a floral setting. I read a few books on photography and some Canon users also complained about the color of the lenses and some have used dark tape to cover up the out of place white color of the lens. I guess if you plan to use the lens for sports, landscape, and macro photography lens color will not be an issue. Let the subject matter you plan to photograph guide you towards the equipment you purchase.

---

Yes, I also find the white colour of the Canon "L" series yucky! Its argued that the white absorbs less heat in the fields. I believe that the whites can get dirty faster! But its all of academic interest to me as I am a Nikon user and unless someone donates a couple of white "L" lenses to me and why would I mind if that were the case? Hey, wait! Who'll give me a white body??;)

Hi Guys,

Many serious shooters (Canon & Nikon) use these in the field - they're great for lens protection too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Guys,

Many serious shooters (Canon & Nikon) use these in the field - they're great for lens protection too.

---

Colin,

I have never used a lens cover. It looks like a good idea and the marketing people at this company definitely know how to address the concerns of potential Canon (and other brands) users.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uspandey

Yes, I also find the white colour of the Canon "L" series yucky! Its argued that the white absorbs less heat in the fields. I believe that the whites can get dirty faster! But its all of academic interest to me as I am a Nikon user and unless someone donates a couple of white "L" lenses to me and why would I mind if that were the case? Hey, wait! Who'll give me a white body??;)

---

Uspandey,

Very amusing, welcome to the group.

Many thanks, Shadowman.

I have been using Nikon cameras and lenses for a long time. I don't think that one can generalize that either Canon or Nikon lenses are "better", they both make some excellent lenses and some not so excellent ones.

Before you embark on spending a lot of money on lenses, you ought to decide whether you want to stay with the DX format (1.5 crop factor) or whether you eventually want to change to the FX Full frame format. If you are planning to stay with DX, Nikon makes quite a few very good variable aperture lenses which are not very heavy and reasonably priced. A lot of people like the DX 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 plus the 70-200 f/4.5-5.6 combo. For a "one lens solution" the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 is quite good.

The full frame f/2.8 zoom lenses 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 are all excellent, with the 14-24 probably the
best wide angle lens on the market. These lenses are quite expensive and heavy. However, they are worth every penny you pay for them.

For what it's worth, I use the f/2.8 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, although my body is a D3s rather than the D300s, but I LOVE these lenses! My work is a combination of marketing, technical and portrait work, and this kit works really well.