Using Nikon Lenses for 5Dii - please help

[Bill Pryor]

When I got the 5D I resurrected my ancient '70s pre-AI Nikkors out of their bag in my basement. I'm using the 24mm, 35, and 105. I also got a Zeiss ZE 50 and Canon L 70-200. I shot an entire commercial production the past 2 days almost exclusively with the 24 and 35, using the 50 for only a couple of shots. The zoom is mostly for interviews so I can change focal length quickly between questions. I have the cheap eBay adapters but may replace them with the Cinevate from B&H which allegedly fit tighter. I also put 77mm stepup rings on all my lenses so they all accept my 77mm filters. I had to get 77mm lens caps too and found the old metal threaded ones at B&H for under $8 each. With the stepup rings I use the same 77mm collapsable lens hood on all the lenses as well.

[Vic Owen]

I found this string amazingly interesting & informative. After having been in the Nikon camp since the 70s, I've decided to make the leap to Canon, with a 5D II.

I have a pretty sizable collection of AI & pre-AI fast primes, and I was discouraged at the thought of having to start from scratch.

Sounds like I'll be able to make good use of what is otherwise some fine glass, until I decide to move into some Canon lenses.

[Bill Pryor]

The only Nikkor I was hesitant about was the 24mm f2.8. It has an unusual segment of rear flange that sticks out a little farther than any of the other Nikkors. It looked as if it might hit the mirror on the Canon. My daughter, however, is a jeweler, and it occurred to me that she routinely cuts and grinds things that cost a lot more than that lens. So she cut off the offending portion of flange, perfectly smooth. Lens works great. I couldn't live without it on most of my shoots.

[Dan Brockett]

I, like many of you, have a mixture of Canon and Nikon glass. The focus direction doesn't bother me in the least. For shooting only video, the Nikons, even though the prices have inflated up, are still a better value than most of the Canons. That said, the Canons are obviously better if you shoot video AND stills. Not having AF on the Nikons makes shooting any stills other than locked off still subjects very tough.

A very nice lens that I would use instead a Nikon, if the focal length suited you, is the Canon 70-200 F4, a great lens. It is reasonable cost, very sharp and looks great. While I like the 70-200 2.8, it is such a beast, way too heavy and at 2.8, usually has too shallow of a DOF, I ended up stopping it down to F4 ot 5.6 anyway to obtain better DOF so why spend the extra money and lug the extra pounds for the 2.8 version?

My favorite lens for my 5D MKII though is the Nikon 105mm 2.8D Micro, it has leagues better contrast and is considerably sharper than any of my other lenses. I used to think my 85mm 1.8 Nikon AI looked good but I recently switched between it and the 105mm 2.8 D on a shoot and the difference was immediately apparent, the 105mm 2.8D is a LOT sharper. Brilliant lens.

I have the Canon 17-40 F4L, the Canon 70-300 F4.5-5.6 IS, the Nikon 50mm F1.4 AI, the 85mm F1.8 AI and the 105mm 2.8 D Micro. I prefer having the manual aperture ring on the Nikons over the rotating knob on the 5D MKII used for aperture adjustment with Canon lenses. I am still looking for a wide angle 2.0 or 2.8 prime, perhaps the 24mm or a 20mm.

Dan

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

I, like many of you, have a mixture of Canon and Nikon glass. The focus direction doesn't bother me in the least. For shooting only video, the Nikons, even though the prices have inflated up, are still a better value than most of the Canons.

I totally agree, except for "the focus direction doesn't bother me in the least" part -- Nikkor lenses aren't just affordable, but also very sharp. If it wasn't for this very issue (focus direction) I doubt I'd even own any Canon glass, besides the 70-200 f/2.8. But I thank the gods that Carl Zeiss got it right -- as I've said many times, my absolute favorite lens is an old 55mm f/1.4 Zeiss prime: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...ml#post1538071

-- peer

[Vic Owen]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

My favorite lens for my 5D MKII though is the Nikon 105mm 2.8D Micro, it has leagues better contrast and is considerably sharper than any of my other lenses. I used to think my 85mm 1.8 Nikon AI looked good but I recently switched between it and the 105mm 2.8 D on a shoot and the difference was immediately apparent, the 105mm 2.8D is a LOT sharper. Brilliant lens.

Dan

I'm happy to read that -- I have the 105mm Micro that I've been using on various Nikon bodies (FM, FE, FA & D70). Once I purchase the 5D, I'll give it a critical look. It's been great on everything, especially the film cameras, and I'll be interested to see what this lens (and other Nikon glass) looks like with 5D.

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

Not having AF on the Nikons makes shooting any stills other than locked off still subjects very tough.

And 100 years worth of photographers just smiled.. It's not THAT hard. I still shut off AF for many subjects. Especially in poor light.

[Bill Pryor]

I agree with Dan, that L 70-200 f4 is an excellent lens. It's light enough so you can still mount the camera on the tripod--no need to mount the lens by a collar. It intercuts well with my pre-AI Nikkors (though they are sharper). The f4 on the L lens is no problem. I tend to shoot most things at f4-5.6 to get enoug depth of field to maintain focus.

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

And 100 years worth of photographers just smiled.. It's not THAT hard. I still shut off AF for many subjects.

Ditto -- I never use AF for stills.

-- peer

[Bill Pryor]

I don't use AF either for anything. Tried it once, too slow.

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

Not having AF on the Nikons makes shooting any stills other than locked off still subjects very tough.

I'm with Dan on this one. Ask the world's top 100 sports and wildlife photographers (the 2 subjects that are the fastest moving and need long lenses, surely the toughest tests) how many of them use manual focus for moving subjects and I'm sure you'll find the answer is nearly or actually zero.
I shoot MF all the time on Varicams etc., so I like to think I know what I'm doing, but in stills I can't even get close to the speed and accuracy of my D3's AF.

Steve

[Perrone Ford]

Steve,

I think there are a number of factors at play.

If you ask 100 of those same still photographers to shoot on an F5, how many of them would be instantly lost? Yea, their cams shoot 8fps. Which on film would give the exactly 3-4 seconds before reload.

The lenses are different as well. The physical movement of an AF lens is vastly different than it's MF counterpart, which makes focusing manually a chore.

Last fall, I went out to a night soccer game with a friend. He handed me his 40d with a nice lens. I hadn't shot sports stills for many years, after it being my bread and butter for so long. As I put the camera to my eye and got familiar with the shutter release, it all started coming back. The autofocus was hunting though. I flipped it off, and started getting some decent shots. My friend wandered over and said, "You can use the live view by pressing this button". I tried it for a few shots then went back to the viewfinder. We stood next to each other for a while shooting. I was on the long lens, he was wide. I'd take shots in 1-3 frame bursts. His bursts were 6-10 frames.

That small exercise made a few things abundantly clear to me. The shooting styles of today, are quite different than the shooting styles of the past. The carefully considered focus and framing of those of us who grew up with film, has largely been replaced by the push and pray that many of us saw as digital started to come to the fore. That's probably a condescending phrase, but I am saying what it was called when I was shooting. Back then, the autofocus wasn't good enough to keep up. Today's cameras have AF that is generally good enough, if there's enough light.

Basic idea like pre-focusing seem to be lost on today's generation of shooters. As are things like going wider in the camera with the idea of printing zoomed in. That was a common technique in sports photography to make sure that you didn't screw up the framing, and the resolving power of film let you re-frame in post. Today's better cameras let you do the same, but early digital cameras didn't really give you enough pixels to do that.

I bought a new 35mm film camera this year. I wonder if I could hand that camera to a "modern' shooter and have them be productive with it. I wonder what they would do if I put a non-AIs lens on it so that no metering information showed up! :)

[Steve Phillipps]

I think the problem Perrone is that the AF systems do take a bit of getting used to. I too am from the old school of film and manual focus (and as I said I still use it for video work and for some stills when I use my video lenses for stills).
Folks don't use your old school ideas of pre-focussing and shooting wide ideas because they're not needed so much now, the cameras can help you out.
Legendary bird photographer Art Morris said of AF than in the previous 20 years or so as a top bird photographer he only made a handful of what he could call bang on in-focus shots of flying birds - when the excellent AF on Canon bodies got established he was getting more than that on every roll!
I don't like AF either and I don't shoot enough stills to be totally familiar with it but all these pros can't be wrong, when you get used to it there's no comparison. Read any number of interviews with wildlife and sports photogs and you'll see they all agree.
Steve

[Perrone Ford]

Well, I now have two decent AF cams. I am going to shoot a bunch of sports stuff this fall, so we'll see how it goes!

[Steve Phillipps]

One thing that most serious switch to very quickly is turning off the AF activation via the shutter button, instead you do it with a button by your thumb. In this way when you lock focus you can then release the button and reframe and shoot without focus shifting. I'm sure there are plenty of other tricks too, and tons of settings to get right for what you're shooting.
Steve