What is Nikon's equivalent of Canon "L" lenses?
- Thread starter noobie
- Start date
- Status
(L)uxuary lens from canon are better, and trusted by profossional.
nikon does not have a upmarket one, never seen or hear before, unlike canon L series
You never hear about trinity lens? Yah..., legendary lens no need mark one :bsmilie: . It is famous by its quality.
Regards,
Arto.
newbie here and decided to go for nikon but I am wondering what are the trinity lens (sorry need some enlightenment from the veterans here)? Are the 17-55, 70-200vr and 200-400 vr or all of Nikon's 2.8 lenses? thanks...
Trinity lens when many people raise their :thumbsup: when talking about specific lens.
Like 50mm f/1.8...???
Regards,
Arto.
Nope... wrong!jeorems said:
Trinities namely:
- AFS17-35 f/2.8D ED (model since 1999)
- AFS28-70 f/2.8D ED (model since 1999)
- AFS80-200 f/2.8D ED (was replaced by the AFS70-200VR f/2.8G ED)
This term is given by most Nikonian professionals overseas. Originated from Nikonian.org abt 5-7yrs ago. Basically the Nikon Trinities means, if you ever own these 3 babies, you dun need another lens other than the 'big guns'. Cos this 3 lenses is known for its, built, performance, image quality, sharpness, colour reproduction, etc.
But this comes with a price. In order to own all the 3 lenses will set you back by ~$8K.
As a nikonian, I'm proud to announce that these 3 lenses does not have any 'patch' models only replacement model to totally replace it, unlike the canon which comes out Mk1, Mk2 etc. As you can see above the 17-35 and the 28-70 lens is a 1999 model, and till date there is not a need to replace it. Do note, this statement is not meant as a flame bait or war. So please dun tarnish this thread as it seems to have already started into flaming.
For nikon, the optics and lens design are often better then Canon, however I do not deny the fact that canon lenses do have an advantage over Nikon when it comes to technology. Focusing speed of a USM L lens is a good example. Not to mention CMOS also have a slight advantage over noise control etc.
Thus at the end of the day, to each his own. It is ultimately the photographer who is the one to produce a good picture. Equipment brand comes in secondary.
YMMV
Yes... the cheap standard lens AF50 f/1.8D lens is really the cheapest 'professional' lens one can easily afford.
Image sharpness, colours, quality of the AF50mm f/1.8D is superb. Not to mention when coupled with a BR2A reverse ring adaptor transform it to become a fantastic macro lens. And also the ability to mount additional close-up filters with the BR3 adaptor can really allow the user to bring macro photography to the next height without expensive macro lenses.
I would be grateful if you can point me to some test that can proof what you said.... This might be true in the film days 20 years ago but how true is it with modern canon and nikon lenses....
Thanks for the very prompt response skyes...now i know which lens to get (but must save first)
just another question(s)...Is 17-55 f2.8 consider a part of this? it also has a gold ring isn't? and most of this lenses can be used on a full-frame camera (including AFS70-200VR f/2.8G ED) without crop factor...am i right? thanks...the info you have shared is really useful to a newbie like me :thumbsup:
Thanks for the very prompt response skyes...now i know which lens to get (but must save first)
Is 17-55 f2.8 consider a part of this? it also has a gold ring isn't? and most of this lenses can be used on a full-frame camera (including AFS70-200VR f/2.8G ED) without crop factor...am i right? thanks...the info you have shared is really useful to a newbie like me :thumbsup:
17-55 f2.8 is a DX series lens, so if I'm not wrong, it won't be able to work on a FF camera.
hmmm I see...now it's getting more clearer...so the trinity series are all FF camera, right? Is there any digital FF for Nikon? Or are there any Dgital FF for other brands as well?
- Status
Similar threads
