Which lens(es) first?

[AngryCorgi]

My D700 should arrive tthis afternoon, but I will have ZERO lenses to attach to it until I go and purchase one/some after work. I am not buying a standard zoom, rather I plan on filling the normal range with primes.

I'm looking at either a fast 35mm, 50mm, 85mm or a wide angle zoom of some sort. I'd like to keep the $ below US$500 for the first purchase too. So, I need ideas from my fellow POTNers.

Vote and explain what model/brand you would grab if in the same boat.

Thanks in advance! ;)

[SoaringUSAEagle]

I'd say a 50 is the way to go.

[AngryCorgi]

I'd say a 50 is the way to go.

Any suggestion which one? I've decided that the 50/1.4G is all about barrel distortion and harsh bokeh so I've ruled it out. That still leaves two nikon-Ds and one sigma and me with no decision. :(

[Bill Roberts]

Personally I'd go with a 35mm first if you're planning on primes and want a good all round lens. Don't ask me which model though... I haven't got a clue on Nikon lenses!

cheers

[AngryCorgi]

Personally I'd go with a 35mm first if you're planning on primes and want a good all round lens. Don't ask me which model though... I haven't got a clue on Nikon lenses!

cheers

Yeah, I dunno anyone who makes a 30-35mm prime for Nikon AF other than Nikon. The 35/2-D has been tempting me as an early addition. I thought about the 40/2 voigtlander, but with no focus screen changing option, I dunno if I would be comfortable with a MF lens with this camera.

[SoaringUSAEagle]

Personally I'd go with a 35mm first if you're planning on primes and want a good all round lens. Don't ask me which model though... I haven't got a clue on Nikon lenses!

cheers

That was a close second.... I did get my 35 before my 50, but I seem to enjoy my 50 more. I dont know Nikon lenses either - sorry ;)

[condyk]

Yeah, I dunno anyone who makes a 30-35mm prime for Nikon AF other than Nikon. The 35/2-D has been tempting me as an early addition. I thought about the 40/2 voigtlander, but with no focus screen changing option, I dunno if I would be comfortable with a MF lens with this camera.

I'd go for the 35mm 2.0 as it's more flexible IMO than any of the other options. I have one and while I don't use it much, as I prefer my Zeiss 25mm and 50mm's as a pair, I do when I want a light, fast good quality lightweight walkaround. it's hard to criticise it and build way better than the Canon 35mm 2.0. I am happy with MF on the D700. The viewfinder is superb.

[AngryCorgi]

Ok, I made my decision, and the 50mm votes win. I'll look for a used 35/2 for the next lens, but for now it's a 50mm world that I see. And here she is...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1138/3164362864_924d16a5b5_b.jpg

...taken by the 50 @ f/2.5 and ISO9000 (adequate lighting is optional!) ;)

[Bill Roberts]

Have fun with it!

Best wishes

[AngryCorgi]

I'd go for the 35mm 2.0 as it's more flexible IMO than any of the other options. I have one and while I don't use it much, as I prefer my Zeiss 25mm and 50mm's as a pair, I do when I want a light, fast good quality lightweight walkaround. it's hard to criticise it and build way better than the Canon 35mm 2.0. I am happy with MF on the D700. The viewfinder is superb.

I've seen youtube vids of the 35/2's AF speed on a D200 and it looks noisy but fast. Is it pretty accurate and how does the screw-drive AF compare to Canon AFD lenses in servo mode? Is it violently twitchy like the Canon 50/1.8 and 35/2?

[condyk]

I've seen youtube vids of the 35/2's AF speed on a D200 and it looks noisy but fast. Is it pretty accurate and how does the screw-drive AF compare to Canon AFD lenses in servo mode? Is it violently twitchy like the Canon 50/1.8 and 35/2?

I just checked as I have never noted a single thing about the lens that could be described as noisy or twitchy. It is fast and accurate. Way better than the old Canon lenses. Good luck with the Sigma. I had one for a while. Rubbish wide open but very good from 2.8.

[AngryCorgi]

I'd go for the 35mm 2.0 as it's more flexible IMO than any of the other options. I have one and while I don't use it much, as I prefer my Zeiss 25mm and 50mm's as a pair, I do when I want a light, fast good quality lightweight walkaround. it's hard to criticise it and build way better than the Canon 35mm 2.0. I am happy with MF on the D700. The viewfinder is superb.

After testing the 50mm with AF off on the lens and body, I can see why it's a tad easier to MF with than the 5D --- the rangefinder with the arrows is considerably more useful than Canon's implementation of focus confirmation. I tested it a dozen times at f/1.4 and have not had one OOF shot yet! I'm impressed. It constantly checks focus even for a few seconds after a half-press of the shutter (until the VF data turns off).

[Perry Ge]

I don't get why you would go Nikon if you are gonna be using short primes...theirs are nowhere near as nice as Canon's USM primes, let alone the L's. Don't get me wrong, I think the D700 is the best body available, but I would've mated it with a 14-24 and the 24-70 zoom. But I see you've gone Sigma anyway - so let us know how that lens treats ya.

[AngryCorgi]

I don't get why you would go Nikon if you are gonna be using short primes...theirs are nowhere near as nice as Canon's USM primes, let alone the L's. Don't get me wrong, I think the D700 is the best body available, but I would've mated it with a 14-24 and the 24-70 zoom. But I see you've gone Sigma anyway - so let us know how that lens treats ya.

First off, are you saying 50mm is "short" or wide? If so, Canon has no advantage there. I'd NEVER spend the obscene amount of money required to buy a 50L and the Nikon 50s (f/1.8 and f/1.4) are almost identical in performance to the Canon 50s. I could have bought the Sigma in Canon...or Pentax...or Olympus...or Sony...or Sigma...I don't need to latch onto Canon to grab that one.

The only potential wide-prime advantage Canon has is the 35L and the 28/1.8 (which some people seem to show disdain for, but seemed like a decent lens). One can always buy a 28/1.4 in Nikon (the competitor for the 24L), but I am unlikely to buy it as much as I was unlikely to purchase a 35L or 24L. The 35/2-D is pretty much the equal of the Canon 35/2, and potentially absent of the AF twitchiness normal with the fast AFD primes in the Canon lineup. The only other USM prime that's "wide" is the 20/2.8, and its not any better than the nikon 20/2.8. All information I've received suggests that most of the screw-driven AF primes in Nikon's range behave better than the AFD lenses in Canon's line.

So I should have stayed with Canon for two lenses I never owned and never intended to own? :confused:

Hey...IMO, the only lens I feel there is no Nikon equal for (that I'd have an interest in) in the Canon line is the 85L.