What is the Nikon L lenses???

For some reasons, I have been asked very often about shopping decisions on Nikon lenses and bodies. What is the Nikon equivalent of the Canon L lenses? I am trying to tell this potential buyer to shop for new Nikon Pro lenses instead of upgrading his D90.

They aren't specifically marked like Canon's L-series is, but their nicer lenses can usually be differentiated by aperture (constant f/2.8 zooms like the 14-24, f/1.4 primes, like the 85) and some of them line up nicely with Canon's offerings, like the 24-70mm f/2.8G and the 70-200 f/2.8G VR, and can be identified that way.

Canon has the red ring, Nikon uses a gold ring. Also a lens marked for FX means it is for full frame, just like Canon's EF. Doesn't mean it's pro, but it has a chance to be.

Victor, it all depends on his budget bcoz' the top end isn't cheap.

Quoting a friend that shoots Nikon. "Yeah, so Nikon's better glass is ED. And their better AF is AFS. Which means there's a motor in the lens. Otherwise it uses the motor in the body to AF." That is the extent of my knowledge.

Like others have said. They don't really indicate it like the L series from Canon but that should give you an idea.

jdizzle wrote in post #14726796
Victor, it all depends on his budget bcoz' the top end isn't cheap.

Yeah it is. I tried Nikon for a year. I LOOOVE my D700 and Nikon's 24 1.4G and 35 1.4G but the cost was waaay too much.

Having L-series lenses just show how superior the Canon marketing is.
A red ring and a series as a status symbol and a trigger for gear lust is genius. It's no surprise Canon have a bigger market share.

They messed up autofocus in the last few years (compared to the Nikon, who did wonders with stuff such as the D700) and are still behind on the entry and medium range models (Rebel series, D60, ...) but are catching up with the 7D and particularly the new 5D which in its Mark3 version is really what the 5D Mark2 should have been... This is why Canon have lost some ground in the pro market. The 5D3 should change things a lot.

Canon don't have a 14-24, which is just something else... I know lots of people who switched to Nikon just for this lens.

its easy to determine their pro lenses based on the price tag

L series are metal and nikon uses a lot of plastic on their high end lenses. Nikon doesn't have a 'pro series' though. You can tell which lenses are their high end products by look and feel. Gold ring on the end, solid, clean lines, usually constant aperture or the fastest prime at a focal length. i.e. 85mm f/1.4G versus the 85mm f/1.8G

Thanks. It looks like he is determined to upgrade to a newer FX body. I mentioned to him about the D700 at KEH. He is planning to do some underwater photography with a dedicated water housing.

pv94 wrote in post #14727019
...and are still behind on the entry and medium range models (Rebel series, D60, ...) but are catching up with the 7D...

Curious statement, especially since the 7D is pretty long in the tooth these days, and as recently as when the T2i was introduced (just a couple of years ago), Canon was the clear leader in entry level. It is Nikon that has been doing the catching up in this segment, IMO.

looks like people mention - nikon 24 1.4G, 35 1.4G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G. Is "G" the same as "L"?

No, G just means that it has no physical aperture ring. Really, the Nikon equiv of "L" is lenses that have a gold ring on them. Sort of. Lenses with the gold ring are likely to have weather sealing and such.

Nikon is much less stingy with things in some ways, though. Like, the 50mm 1.8G has a rubber weather sealing gasket on the mount (though it isn't advertised as weather sealed) and has fast auto focus with full time manual and a nice build. Comes with a hood, etc. Compare to the Canon 50mm 1.8. Lol. Yeah.

They can skimp on things compared to Canon, too, though. An example would be the 24 1.4G. Fantastic optics. Super pricey, great lens. However, the AF motor on it is a micro-USM type motor (like in Canon's 50mm 1.4 and 70-300 IS USM). Many other expensive Nikkor lenses have micro-USM type motors instead of "ring USM" type motors (obviously not called USM by Nikkor--but SWM). Another example of this is the 24-120mm VR. I think this also uses a micro-USM type motor. Wheras on Canon 24-105 you get a real ring motor.

You win some you lose some, just depends. Cheaper AF-D (older lenses, with an aperture dial), from the 90's, say, are often built really, really, well, too.

woos wrote in post #14730141
No, G just means that it has no physical aperture ring. Really, the Nikon equiv of "L" is lenses that have a gold ring on them. Sort of. Lenses with the gold ring are likely to have weather sealing and such.

Nikon is much less stingy with things in some ways, though. Like, the 50mm 1.8G has a rubber weather sealing gasket on the mount (though it isn't advertised as weather sealed) and has fast auto focus with full time manual and a nice build. Comes with a hood, etc. Compare to the Canon 50mm 1.8. Lol. Yeah.

They can skimp on things compared to Canon, too, though. An example would be the 24 1.4G. Fantastic optics. Super pricey, great lens. However, the AF motor on it is a micro-USM type motor (like in Canon's 50mm 1.4 and 70-300 IS USM). Many other expensive Nikkor lenses have micro-USM type motors instead of "ring USM" type motors (obviously not called USM by Nikkor--but SWM). Another example of this is the 24-120mm VR. I think this also uses a micro-USM type motor. Wheras on Canon 24-105 you get a real ring motor.

You win some you lose some, just depends. Cheaper AF-D (older lenses, with an aperture dial), from the 90's, say, are often built really, really, well, too.

This is the reason why I would never shoot Nikon. Their lens spec designations are too confusing.....

RTPVid wrote in post #14729734
Curious statement, especially since the 7D is pretty long in the tooth these days, and as recently as when the T2i was introduced (just a couple of years ago), Canon was the clear leader in entry level. It is Nikon that has been doing the catching up in this segment, IMO.

I was going to say, has Nikon ever really led in the entry level segment?

woos wrote in post #14730141
Nikon is much less stingy with things in some ways, though. Like, the 50mm 1.8G has a rubber weather sealing gasket on the mount (though it isn't advertised as weather sealed) and has fast auto focus with full time manual and a nice build. Comes with a hood, etc. Compare to the Canon 50mm 1.8. Lol. Yeah.

You do realize the price difference between these two lenses, right? The Nikon is nearly twice the price of the Canon! Coming with the hood would be nice though, Canon is stingy with that until you hit L series (or at least certain specialty lenses like the 90mm TS-E).

It's hard to compare lenses just on the specs or the focal length. Canon's 24-105 4L IS is more expensive than Nikon's 24-120, seeing differences in the type of focus motor or other things wouldn't be surprising. No big surprises if you're paying less and getting less.