Nikon lenses

[timk]

Hi all, I'm looking to ebay all of my 35mm cameras and focus on a single system. I want some advice on what Nikon lenses I should get if I decide to go with Nikon, I currently use an Olympus OM system and I find the lenses are excellent (I may opt to stay with oly but haven't made my mind up yet).

So, I have a Nikon F4s but only a 50mm f/1.8

I'd like:
- a fast 50mm lens (to replace the zuiko 50/1.4)
- a portrait lens ~100mm (to replace the zuiko 100/2.8)
- a wide zoom lens (to replace the zuiko 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8)
- a macro lens (something to replace the zuiko 50mm f/3.5 macro)
- a long lens 200-300mm (to replace the zuiko 200 f/4, 300mm f/5.6)

So, It has to be better than the zuiko gear, lens speed needs to be equal or faster

I'm not fussed about whether they are auto or manual focus.

I'll probably have $3k to spend on lenses I estimate after I sell up all my olympus bodies and lenses.

So, suggestions? :confused:

 

[Walter61]

Nikkor 20mm f2,8 AIS or AFD
Nikkor 28mm f2,8 AIS or AFD
Nikkor 35mm f1,4 AIS
Nikkor 50mm f1,2 AIS or f1,4 AIS/AFD
Nikkor 105 f2,5 AIS
Nikkor 180 f2,8 AIS or AFD

 

[blockend]

Why do you want to change systems? I'm a Nikon user but I doubt you'll see any tangible difference between your Zuikos and Nikkor lenses. Spend the three grand on film and enjoy shooting the 50mm on your F4.

 

[2F/2F]

Sounds like you already have everything you need. Why does it not work for you?

 

[Jesper]

I agree with the others. You seem to have an excellent system as it is.

 

[2F/2F]

FWIW, I have never used a fixed-focal-length lens from any "top rung" camera/lens maker that 1) was not up to my technical standards, and 2) was discernible enough from any other brand's similarly spec'd lens to such a degree that I would bother choosing one or the other if given a choice based on image quality alone. I would make a choice based on maximum aperture, the camera body I prefer using, and other such things, but not on sharpness and the like. I am not saying that there are not differences, but that far too much is made of them. My experience is limited to Canon FD/FL, Nikon pre-AI, Minolta, Pentax K, Pentax thread mount, Canon EF, and a little bit with Olympus SLR lenses.

So, my points are 1) You will do well with any quality lens from any major manufacturer, and Nikon is one of the best, and 2) I just cannot see why you want to unload a whole system that you like, just to get another, unless you are really unhappy with the way the camera bodies handle in use.

My experience with Nikon pre-AI lenses has been that they are excellent, and a huge bang for the buck. However, the F and F2 bodies leave me with nothing to be desired, so I am OK with not being able to use the later bodies with them. If you go for AI and later lenses, you will pay more (and possibly a good deal more), but will have more lenses to choose from, and more compatibility with various camera bodies. I don't imagine that AI or later lenses are any worse than the pre-AI ones optically, so I would say to not have any reservations about any Nikon fixed-length lens that you are looking at.

 

[Q.G.]

I used to use a rather extensive Olumpus OM kit, and though Zuikos are as good as any other top brand, i'm not going add my 'vote' to the "keep what you have" side.
If you like the Nikon F4s more, i can't see any reason (apart from the practicalities of making the switch 'happen') why you shouldn't move to Nikon.

 

[Johnkpap]

Why don't you do this, I have a large number of Pentax and tamron Lenses and pentax cameras which I am very happy with, sometimes I also use a
old well used Nikon FE... I just like using it... Instead of buying a whole new set of lenses I just bought a basic set of "bargin" grade lenses and a Tamron AI mount.

I have a number of tamron Adaptall 2 lenses that I use with my pentax cameras, all I bought was a Nikkon 20mm F3.5ai, 35-100mm AIS Zoom, 50mm 1.8 AI.

I have in tamron 28mm 2.5, 105mm 2.5, 80-210 3.8, 200 3.5, 200-500 f8 plus a Tamron 2x conv

Tamron Lenses are a good buy as you can use them with any 35mm camera all you need is a mount for your next camera.

Johnkpap

 

[narsuitus]

If I were in your situation, here is what I would do:

1. Keep my Olympus manual-focus prime-lens system.

2. Buy the following lenses on the used market as part of my Nikon F4 auto-focus zoom-lens system:

a) 17-35mm or 24-35mm f/2.8 Nikon auto focus

b) 35-70mm f/2.8 Nikon auto focus

c) 80-200mm f/2.8 Nikon auto focus

 

[rmont2]

Switching systems

I agree with the others who say keep what you have. I have an extensive Nikon MF system which I like but I wouldn't unload an equally capable OM system for it.

 

[jerry lebens]

Stick with the OM system. Ok, the Nikon build quality is marginally better than Olympus but, unless you're a total klutz, it won't matter. Besides second hand Olympus gear is cheaper than Nikon and it's much less likely to have been run into the ground by a pro. Lot's of amateurs bought Olympus, because of the heavy advertising, but hardly ever used it.

Regards
Jerry

 

[jp498]

Hi all, I'm looking to ebay all of my 35mm cameras and focus on a single system. I want some advice on what Nikon lenses I should get if I decide to go with Nikon, I currently use an Olympus OM system and I find the lenses are excellent (I may opt to stay with oly but haven't made my mind up yet).

So, I have a Nikon F4s but only a 50mm f/1.8

I'd like:
- a fast 50mm lens (to replace the zuiko 50/1.4)
- a portrait lens ~100mm (to replace the zuiko 100/2.8)
- a wide zoom lens (to replace the zuiko 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8)
- a macro lens (something to replace the zuiko 50mm f/3.5 macro)
- a long lens 200-300mm (to replace the zuiko 200 f/4, 300mm f/5.6)

So, It has to be better than the zuiko gear, lens speed needs to be equal or faster

I'm not fussed about whether they are auto or manual focus.

I'll probably have $3k to spend on lenses I estimate after I sell up all my olympus bodies and lenses.

So, suggestions? :confused:

I made the same switch in 1990. (OM to F4s). I was growing my skills from casual people photography to a mix of people , sports, and nature photography, and Olympus didn't have anything suitable for covering sports. The aftermarket lens options new and used continue to be a good reason to use Nikon. And if you end up going digital as well, several of the DSLRs maintain the ability to use manual lenses.

Your options as suggested by me of things I've used or owned or own.
for normal 50mm 1.4d-af or Voigtlander 40sl2 (manual and expensive and worth it), or 50 1.2 AIS (expensive but not quite as sharp as the 1.4, good for a little softness wide open)
for portrait 105 2.5 AI/AIS or 105 2.0 dc d-af (expensive and worth it)
for wide 28-70 2.8 ed-if-afs zoom (expensive and worth it) or 35-70 af zoom cheaper but good
for macro 55 3.5 AI
for long 70-300 ED AF or used 300 2.8 from Tokina or Nikon.

I've owned 1990's version of 28-70 2.8af Tokina and 80-200af 2.8 Sigma and they are fine for B&W but exhibit great amounts of aberration in digital color use. They are not quite as well constructed as the Nikon either.

 

[Pumalite]

Stick to OM and Zuiko. Keep it and get a Nikon. I'm with the others: FM, FE, FM2, F3HP, F4. As for portraits: I like the 85mm F/2. For wide: the 35mm. 28mm, 24mm; I even have a 20mm but is AF. Don get rid of Olympus; you will regret it. I have the M-1, OM1, OM-1n, OM-2, OM-2n, OM-4T, with a full complement of lenses. Today; at these prices; is not worth it to get rid of good equipment. ( I have to confess that I use my Nikon F, F2 and Nikkormats very often )

 

[Vincent Brady]

I have an extensive range of Olympus gear, but I changed over to Nikon because of the auto wind on and the auto focus perks. I never sold my Olympus cameras and still use the OM4Ti & 24 mm lens to shoot my IR film.

Vincent

 

[blockend]

Stick with the OM system. Ok, the Nikon build quality is marginally better than Olympus but, unless you're a total klutz, it won't matter. Besides second hand Olympus gear is cheaper than Nikon and it's much less likely to have been run into the ground by a pro. Lot's of amateurs bought Olympus, because of the heavy advertising, but hardly ever used it.

Regards
Jerry

Jerry makes an important point. Although my kit is principally Nikon I became disillusioned with the amount of worn out AI and pre-AI junk that had to be returned due to mechanical or glass issues, and tend to buy Canon FD these days. Mint old Nikkors attract a very high premium and I don't believe you'd find lenses of similar quality to your Zuikos without a) a large financial input, or b) a long search. Olympus cameras tended to live pampered lives in never-ready cases, Nikons, very rarely.

 

[jerry lebens]

Jerry makes an important point. Although my kit is principally Nikon I became disillusioned with the amount of worn out AI and pre-AI junk that had to be returned due to mechanical or glass issues, and tend to buy Canon FD these days. Mint old Nikkors attract a very high premium and I don't believe you'd find lenses of similar quality to your Zuikos without a) a large financial input, or b) a long search. Olympus cameras tended to live pampered lives in never-ready cases, Nikons, very rarely.

"Never ready cases" Like it!

Jerry

 

[Johnkpap]

I am also with Jerry,

All My Pentax lenses live pampered lifes in foam slots n metal cases, mint pentax lenses are selling for more than I paid for them.
If all your Olympus lenses are mint keep them, you won't find it easy to find Clean Nikon AI / AIS glass at a reasonable price.

Just buy 2 or three lenses for your F4 and keep using the nice Olympus glass.


Johnkpap

 

[blockend]

Based on the OPs requirements and assuming he wants to replace clean lenses with similar without trusting himself to the vagueries of ebay, Grays of Westminster have the following manual focus AIS lenses from the Zuiko era:

20mm 2.8, new old stock: £739.00 (mint- £545)
50mm 1.4 mint: £475.00
105mm 1.8 mint: £695.00
55mm 2.8 micro new old stock: £525.00 (mint £445)
25-50mm 4 ex++: £225
100-300 5.6 mint £300
for someone serious about wide apertures how about...
50-300 4.5 ex++ £1750

Ouch!

 

[fschifano]

Well. after reading all this I'd say do what you want but rest assured that you will burn through a lot of money awfully fast for top quality Nikon gear. I know the Olympus system doesn't have the cachet that Nikon gear has, but do you really care about that? I don't. However, if the Nikon gear will allow you do do something you want to do that you can't do with the Olympus, then go for it. You live only once.

 

[Kisatchie]

...you won't find it easy to find Clean Nikon AI / AIS glass at a reasonable price...

I respectfully disagree. :confused:

 

[JayGannon]

Based on the OPs requirements and assuming he wants to replace clean lenses with similar without trusting himself to the vagueries of ebay, Grays of Westminster have the following manual focus AIS lenses from the Zuiko era:

20mm 2.8, new old stock: £739.00 (mint- £545)
50mm 1.4 mint: £475.00
105mm 1.8 mint: £695.00
55mm 2.8 micro new old stock: £525.00 (mint £445)
25-50mm 4 ex++: £225
100-300 5.6 mint £300
for someone serious about wide apertures how about...
50-300 4.5 ex++ £1750

Ouch!

Or go down the road to Aperture and get all of that gear at 10x better prices and fantastic service and noodles to go with it!

For example I got a MINT 55mm 2.8 Macro for 140 pounds, a fraction of what I was expecting so I got a ton more stuff while I was there =)

 

[blockend]

There's certainly cheaper gear that Gray's but their descriptions are accurate, mint will be pre-owned with no signs of use, not just good condition. My ebay purchases rarely uncover anything cheap which isn't that way for a reason, at least in Nikkor lenses. Canon FD is the reverse, lenses are a bargain but F1 bodies in good nick, expensive, at least in the UK. Pristine manual focus Nikkors tend to be hived away by collectors to a greater extent than other marques.

 

[Mick Fagan]

If you wish to try some or most of the lenses on your wish list, then you can come across town and see and feel them on your camera.

Pretty much, I have everything on your list and some.

Depending on whether you are after outright speed, or quality, I think you'll find the 50 f/1.8 is a better lens than the f/1.4, which is marginally better than the f/1.2. I've tried all three of those and a couple of others, the f/1.8 is the one I chose.

The 85 f/1.4 is brilliant and usually a better proposition than the 50 f/1.4 as in you can stand back slightly of get a closer crop with the slightly longer focal length.

Yep the 55 f/2.8 Micro Nikkor is brilliant, one of the few direct comparison Zuiko/Nikkor lenses that is slightly better than the Olympus.

The 105 f/2.5 is brilliant, forget the 100.

The 180 f/2.8 is the longest handheld portrait/theatre lens you could or would generally use.

I would suggets the 18mm f/3.5 is relatively cheap and quite a bit better than the 20mm but that's your call.

The full frame rectilinear 16mm is one of the wonders of the world, I don't have one but i have used one and it's one of the few 35mm lenses I would like.

If you do get a 300 then ensure you get an ED version, doesn't matter which type.

Nikkor lenses availability in Australia, far exceeds Olympus stuff by a very long margin, perhaps this is the reason for the switch, I don't know and don't care.

Just a call away and you can try some interesting and slightly old and in some cases slightly good Nikkor stuff, it may help you make up your mind.

Mick.