Here's the deal, I've been a happy Nikon owner and user for 8 years or so now. I got into Nikon because the first photographer I worked for owned Nikon, so it made sense to be able to borrow his more expensive lenses if I wanted to.

I currently own: F5, Fuji S1, 80-200/2.8, 17-35/2.8 AFS, 20/2.8, 16/2.8 fisheye, 28-70/2.6-2.8 Tokina, two speed lights and various acessories. In general this has been a very complete and capable system for me.

However, I have become addicted to digital photography and now shoot 95% of my working photography digitally (I shoot extreme sports for various magazines). The fuji has been a fine performing camera, with only a few drawbacks, most of which center around the cheap body it was built on. The D1x is great, but the images weren't that much better than the Fuji (for what I'm doing) and the D1h didn't have a fast enough frame rate for me to be able to shoot digital sequences (the orignal D1 has too many image issues for me to want to deal with).

But now that the EOS-1d has come out, I'm seriously thinking of dumping my Nikon gear and going over to Canon (gasp!). It would solve all of the problems that the Fuji gave me (AF thumb button, flash synch speed, af points), plus let me do 8fps sequences which would increase my sales easily.

After all that, here are my questions:

1. What are "L" lenses? Is there a big difference between L and non-L prime lenses?

2. Are non USM lenses loud compared to my non AFS Nikon AF lenses?

3. Since I wouldn't be able to afford to replace my Nikon lenses exactly with Canon ones (and I would like to make a smaller kit for all the traveling I do). Can anyone suggest a selection of primes that might fit my usage? In 35mm equivalents I like 16 fisheye, 20, 35, 50 (sort of), 85, & 120-200 or so. Remember that the 1D has a 1.3x foral length multiplier.

4. Canon flashes? What is a good one?

5. Is it just me, or does it seem like it's hard to find Canon lenses used, other than the cheap-o 35-300 zoom lenses. There seems to be way more Nikon lenses on e-bay than Canon ones.

Any other thoughts would be greatly appriciated. Unless you are going to warn me about having to learn a whole new camera interface. I'm not worried about that. Having grown up in the digital age, I'm used to having to learn a new electronic toy every few months. So that's the least of my worries. Selling my gear to get the $5500 for the 1D is the scariest of my worries.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), December 27, 2001

Answers

You have made a wise decision. I switched over about 6 months ago and haven't looked back. To answer your questions.

1. L series lenses are Canon's top performers for the most part you can't go wrong with an L lens. Check out www.photodo.com under products to see lens ratings. With L zooms vs primes you are usually going to be splitting hairs unless you are printing 16X20 or 20X24 however since you are mostly digital the old rules of enlarging and neccessary resolution are way outdated. Thank you god for Genuine Fractals.

2. All Canon lenses have the motors built into the lens. The non USM will be a little louder and a little slower but it is not like using a Nikon lens that is driven by the body.

3. Ebay! You would be suprised what you can get for your equipment. Way better than a trade in at any camera store. I would sugest only Canon lenses. First purchase 16-35mm 2.8 that takes care of the 20- 45mm range skip the 17-35mm I have heard that it is soft. Second get the 70-200mm 2.8 {translates to 90-260mm} IS or non IS there is a large price difference so this one will hurt or hurt alot. The image stabilization would be nice but on a budget .... Third 28-70mm 2.8 (36-90}. Fit your 15mm fisheye in there somewhere and you are set. Try to stay away from the non L lenses some are very good like the 28-135 or the 24-85 some are crap you would have to research a little more on www.photodo.com do not compromise on the 70- 200mm 2.8 it is an incredible lens.

4. Canon 550EX or Metz 54MZ-3 {sold with Canon dedicated shoe}

5. Canon is really the best thing out there. Nikon just can't compete and is increasingly falling behind. For example Canon has the largest selection, fastest apertures, more specilal application, image stabilized, and more durable line of lenses. The D1H is a joke, as well as the interpolated D1X. The D1X produces great images but dividing the pixels in half and interpolating them into a reconizable image is not really an advance and IMHO a scam. And there are way more advantages in Canon bodies than Nikon's. Real weatherproof seals, better focus tracking, and like all Canon's other products a step or two ahead of Nikon.

Yes the $5500.00 is scary. At least you are getting into a better system. I have used both the EOS 1D and the D1X if you would like a preview of the speed and how well the 1D works try a 1V it's exactly the same except it has a LCD screen in the back. Also in the future you will see real advances from Canon instead of money wasting baby steps. They might take a little while longer but it is very much worth it. Hope this helps.

-- john (mr.-n-mrs.g@att.net), December 27, 2001.

Well those are the lenses that I would love to have. But I don't think I will be able to afford them right away if I am going to get the 1D. The three zooms are going to run $3500 easily. I have a feeling I will be better off with one zoom and some primes or all primes. Besides, this is something I was planning to do with my nikon gear since I'm tired of lugging my big zooms all around the country. I wanted to lighten up before I head to Europe this spring, so I was looking into Nikon primes.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), December 27, 2001.

A 15mm + 20mm f2.8 + 35mm f2 + 50mm f1.4 + 85 f1.8 + 70-200mm f2.8 is also about $3500.00 If you figuer out the space at about 4 inches per lens {primes} 5 lenses X 4 = 20 inches. The 16-35 and the 28-70 are both about 7 inches that's 14 inches. Lets say you keep one lens on the camera at all times and carry the 70-200 in the bag. You need a bag that will hold the 70-200 and 4 lenses totaling another 16 inches plus padding plus the normal photo stuff. Go with zooms and other than your 70-200 you need 7 inches plus padding & stuff. It doesn't seem like alot but a single 7 inch lens is easier to cary on it's own vs. 4 seperate lenses. Also digital cameras do not like lens changes. Dust getting into the camera is attracted to sensors especially to CCD sensors because of the electical charge. With a zoom you would of course have less lens changes. By the way also try to stay away from push pull zooms like the 100-400. They suck in and force out air theroreticly making dust problems worse. Just some things to think about and I'm not trying to force zooms on you just being argumentitive for your own sake. Just repeating my own thought process when I switched over. I was kinda on the other side and am not a big fan of wide angles. I ended up with a 20mm 2.8, 28-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 non IS, and a 1.4x teleconverter. I plan to add an extension tube or 100mm macro and depending on if I get a 1D, DCS 560, or wait for the full frame maybe switching the 20mm to a 16- 35.

-- john (mr.-n-mrs.g@att.net), December 27, 2001.

First off, I have to thank you for your well thought out answers. I foolishly asked this question over at the photo.net forum also and am getting a lot of stupid replies about how dumb I am to be chasing after the latest greatest thing etc. I am a professional shooter, this is my only job, I know what I need to get the job done. What I don't know is about canon lenses and acessories.

Now, back to your reply.

Here's what I was planning to do if I went to a traveling prime kit for my Nikon/Fuji set up: 16mm fisheye (aprox 20mm equiv or so on the S1), 20/2.8 (30mm on S1), 50/1.8 (75 on S1), 85/1.8 (127 or so on S1), 1.4x teleconverter (177 aprox on s1). There might be some vingetting with the 85/1.8 and the TC, so I would have to test it. But I think the 1.5x focal multiplier of the S1 would eliminate it. The 20/50 are both about 2.5 inches and the 85 about 2.8 inches. The Canons seem to be a little bit bigger, about .3 of an inch. Probably because on the internal lens motor.

The 80-200 (or 70-200 Canon) are BIG heavy lenses and it's mostly those which I don't want to travel with if I can avoid it. Many of my most admired photojournalists use just a handful of primes (although some seem to be adding a wide zoom in also these days). Using a 17-35 or a 28-70 instead of primes might work well. Although I am trying to make my gear a little less indimidating for the photojournalism style work that I am pushing to move into. Smaller primes seem to not scare people as much a big 77mm filter thread wise zooms. Although, yes, switching lenses isn't a great idea with digital cameras. But I do it a lot already, so I don't anticipate many more dust problems than I have now (and it is somewhat of a problem, but I think that comes with the digital SLR world).

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), December 27, 2001.

Ok so the same lens set up for the Canon 1D is 15mm fisheye, 24/2.8, 50/1.8, and a 100/2. Not too expensive probably $1600.00 for the whole set up. As for a teleconverter they can only be used with most L type zooms. This also applies to Nikon plus the AF does not work. Are you using the fisheye for a wide angle? If yes the 16-35 {20-45 on 1D} + 85mm {110mm} will be about $1900. If no you really want the fisheye effect primes might be the best for you. If you are leaning tword photojournalism I have heard of some people using primes. I have met several of the Chicago Sun Times, Tribune, Daily Hearald, and Daily Southtown photographers. The only person I have met shooting primes was a Leica purist and I don't think he will ever give them up. Keep in mind that your average PJ has at least two cameras on them at all times which means they have two focal lengths ready to go at any given moment. My wife is actually a photojournalist. She unfortunatly has to buy her own equipment so she is using film. {and I think she really doesn't want to go digital} She carries 2 F5s one with a 24-120 on it and the other with a 80- 200. She usually caries an F3P with a 20mm on it or stores the 20 in her pocket. She also carries a 300mm 2.8. I have 3 friends that are full time staff PJ they were provided {free} with 2 Nikon D1s. All three have been given the 17-35, 28-70, and 80-200 and all three have said that they have the 17-35 and 80-200 on their cameras at all times and sometimes use the 28-70. One keeps an N90s with the 28-70 just as a backup but rarely uses it.

So finally to my point. If you are going for PJ and use primes you will probably need at least 2 cameras {leica guy had 5}

2 Canon 1Ds are $11,000 {I paid just a couple thousand more for my car!} plus your lenses.

You could use a D30 as a 2nd body they are about $2300.00 at the moment. With the D30's 1.6X a 50mm turns into an 80. You will have to spend about $7800.00 on the bodies and still cary two lenses. So you are in the $10,000.00 to $15,000.00 range.

A 1D + a 16-35 will be $7000.00 add a 50 and 85 you are at $7500.00 or add a 28-70 or 28-135 and you are in the $7500-$8000.00 range PLUS you can get by with one body because you will only be switching two lenses.

How long will take for your investment to pay itself off? How much will it make for you? Those might be questions to ask. You might also think about what images you might miss while fumbling for the right lens. A moment is just a brief period of time use the best tools to capture it. I know people argue PJs have taken incredible images with primes being the only lenses available. They have made similar arguments about 35mm vs press cameras and most recently about digital vs film. The point that everyone misses is that you have to get what you can within your budget as well as the tools that will work best for you. You being the most important part of the equasion and not what others have done or said. I say there are options if they work for you, use them.

-- john (mr.-n-mrs.g@att.net), December 28, 2001.

Another lens you might wish to consider, if you don't want the big, heavy 70-200 F2.8L is the smaller, lighter, but NOT optically inferior 70-200 F4L USM. Many people on this forum use this lens, and very few bad words are ever said about it (other than "Why hasn't it got IS?"

L series lenses are as follows: They contain a ground/polished aspherical element, and/or (super) Ultra-Low Dispersion Element(s), and/or Fluorite element(s). Thus, these lenses typically have excellent image quality, and they are also built to very high standards.

I wouldn't imagine that, buying new kit now to go with an EOS 1D, you'd be likely to buy any non-USM lenses.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), December 29, 2001.

3. Since I wouldn't be able to afford to replace my Nikon lenses exactly with Canon ones (and I would like to make a smaller kit for all the traveling I do). Can anyone suggest a selection of primes that might fit my usage? In 35mm equivalents I like 16 fisheye, 20, 35, 50 (sort of), 85, & 120-200 or so. Remember that the 1D has a 1.3x focal length multiplier.

Buy a Nikon/EOS lens adapter (about $30 on ebay). You can keep some of your Nikon lenses as you gradually sell them off and acquire Canon EF lenses.

-- Dave Herzstein (dherzstein@juno.com), January 02, 2002.