Nikon Lenses

[deanp]

What are the major differences between Nikon's AF-I lenses and AF-S / AF-S II lenses?

My next step should be a prime 300mm, which obviously are pretty expensive and out of reach if looking at new. There is a 300mm f2.8 AF-I lens local to me that I may be able to get my hands on.

I need the long reach for two entirely different subjects - racing and wildlife. I have the Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6VR lens and a 2x teleconverter, but the light fall off with this combination eliminates the VR and autofocus capabilities. It also made some shots of nesting blue herons that were active towards dusk last spring difficult to get because of the longer shutter times associated with the lower light and lens/converter combo.

Thoughts?

[Steve Carlton]

All the 2.8s are supposed to be excellent, optically. The AF-S versions have a faster, quieter internal focusing motor. Nikon doesn't support parts for the AF-I lenses, so if it breaks you could be out of luck unless some independent can handle it.

Nikon doesn't recommend any TC on a 70-300VR, but sometimes you can get away with it. As you go from 1.4 to 1.7 to 2.0, the image quality drops off rapidly. Some primes will pull the 1.4 and 1.7 effortlessly.

A good compromise that is highly regarded is the 300mm f/4 AF-S. The newer bodies (D90 and D300) have much better high ISO capabilities, compensating for the slower apertures. I assume you're using a crop body for greater reach, vs a D3 or D700. A TC 1.4 doesn't faze the 300mm f/4 AF-S, and a 1.7 has minimal impact. 2.0 is pushing it hard, but nothing like on the 70-300VR. Nikon lenses purchased new have a 5 year warranty if you register it, but only to the original purchaser (Nikon will want to see a copy of the original receipt for service).

Are you using a tripod or monopod? Those 2.8s can get heavy after a little while.

Some links:

Do a "Topic search" for AF-I, etc. here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/7

Bjorn Roslett is very highly regarded:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Thom Hogan is a very highly regarded Nikon guru:
http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm

A good lens resource:
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#300

There's also the Nikonians forum, which I don't follow, and Ken Rockwell, who is hit and miss.

[deanp]

Thanks Steve, I'll check out the links. Good to hear about the 300 f4 AF-S lens as well, I'll check that out carefully.

I saw the AF-I lens at lunchtime and it is in perfect shape, but at $1700 isn't much of a deal if service is questionable. That's a lot of $$ for an expensive paperweight if things went wrong! Especially compared to the slightly slower NEW f4 lens with warranty at $1000+/-, that would allow a 1.4 or 1.7 Nikon TC as well for even more flexibility.

I am shooting with a D50 body, so am somewhat limited with regards to ISO as compared to a few of the newer bodies.

Ideally I am looking for the same reach I have now with the 300mm but better separation of the subject from the background in action shots, and a faster shutter speed for more clarity on the long reach wildlife. I'll research more, but do you think the 300 f4 would help in that regard?

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

, and Ken Rockwell, who is hit and miss.

not true...he's always funny.

[slodave]

I have no problems with the 1.7 TC on a Nikon 200-400VR. The 2.0 is known to have its issues and not recommended.

[Steve Carlton]

I researched telephotos a bit before landing on the 300mm f/4 AF-S. It doesn't have VR and it's not a zoom. But it focuses quickly, the image quality is there in spades and it'll pull up to a 1.7 TC well. Zooms in this range aren't very fast and don't focus as well unless you drop big coin like on the 200-400VR. You need focusing speed in your application.

Your D50 is one of the weak links in the chain. A D300 would be the way to go, but they range from $1,200 used to around $1,450 new. Next tier down is the D200 and D80, which are selling dirt cheap for what you get. The higher ISO capabilities will offset the need for faster glass and give you more low light capability, so you could put some of your budget towards a body as well. In addition, you'll gain a whole host of other advantages, like frame rate, resolution and white balance.

On telephotos, the need for shallow depth of field is less critical, as they're all shallow at the "wider" apertures, which creates separation. Even with a 2.8 lens, it's likely better image quality is available stopped down more than a bit anyway. F/4 is only one stop slower than f/2.8, so it requires double the ISO for the same shutter speed. See here:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Here's a good resource to see specific images from different lenses:
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/

[nostatic]

From what I've read the D90 is a significant upgrade from the D80, so that is the way to go in that tier. I still have an 18-70 Nikon lens sitting around and every once in awhile ponder going back to Nikon, though that lens wouldn't be a deciding factor. The D700 is tempting but I can't help but think that it is a stopgap until they put a higher resolution sensor in it. The D3x price is just insane and I think you'll see that drop quickly especially given this economy.

I sometimes fear for Pentax, but still love the glass and prefer it over the equivalent Nikon. I really don't see an equivalent for the Pentax ltd primes wrt build quality and image "look."

[slodave]

Originally Posted by nostatic

From what I've read the D90 is a significant upgrade from the D80, so that is the way to go in that tier. I still have an 18-70 Nikon lens sitting around and every once in awhile ponder going back to Nikon, though that lens wouldn't be a deciding factor. The D700 is tempting but I can't help but think that it is a stopgap until they put a higher resolution sensor in it. The D3x price is just insane and I think you'll see that drop quickly especially given this economy.

I sometimes fear for Pentax, but still love the glass and prefer it over the equivalent Nikon. I really don't see an equivalent for the Pentax ltd primes wrt build quality and image "look."

If Dean is shooting wildlife, he does not want a full frame sensor. I suppose action shots would be better with a partial frame as well.

BTW, the D100, even though old now, still performs well in low light conditions.

[Steve Carlton]

Oops, I meant to include the D90 along with the D300 for best high ISO performance these days with a crop sensor. Might even be a bit better than the D300 WRT high ISO.

[deanp]

I know I still have things to learn, and like the D50. I am sure there are advantages in stepping up to a higher level body, but for now I think I am going to focus on getting some higher quality lenses. I have gone as far as a 28" x 36" print and am very satisfied with the image.

Here are a few shots I've taken with the D50 and the 70-300VR.

[nostatic]

Nice shots, though I'm not digging the Heron. That one have a TC on it?

[deanp]

The Heron was cropped in close and saved as a small JPG. Original image is below and another from that morning are below -

[deanp]

And this is where I had the 300mm, no TC and not enough light and speed to get the clarity that would've made the difference.




cropped and upsampled section of the nest:

[deanp]

And these are the 70-300VR, at 300mm, no TC, ISO 200, shutter speed 1/640, panning.

[Hads930]

Any suggestions as far as forums or books for a first timer? I moved up from a Sony point and shoot and got my new D-90 about two hours ago. I know I bought way too much camera but still need to get started on terminology and the basics before I send my wife to a class with it. Please advise-Thanks.

[slodave]

Originally Posted by Hads930

Any suggestions as far as forums or books for a first timer? I moved up from a Sony point and shoot and got my new D-90 about two hours ago. I know I bought way too much camera but still need to get started on terminology and the basics before I send my wife to a class with it. Please advise-Thanks.

Naw, too much would have been the D3x.

www.dpreview.com - Reviews on all things camera.
www.nikonians.com - All things Nikon w/forum.

No idea on books. Can't go wrong with the manual though.

[nostatic]

I find the dpreview site to be...annoying. I hate the layout of the forums, and there is way too much fanboy nonsense and pixel peeping for my taste. I much prefer Thom Hogan's site (referenced above), and he has books on Nikon stuff. I haven't read them, but given the writing quality on his site I'd think they'd be pretty decent. Another site that I really like is www.reidreviews.com, but it is a subscription site. It is a little more old school but he has some great general essays along with real use reviews of some lenses and bodies (though more slanted towards Leica and manual focus glass).

Enjoy the D90 - looks to be a pretty fun camera with great capabilities.

[kycarguy 935]

Great and timely post.

I am getting ready for a new D90. Where is the best place to buy one with the US warranty?

[slodave]

Originally Posted by kycarguy 935

Great and timely post.

I am getting ready for a new D90. Where is the best place to buy one with the US warranty?

B&H... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/
They offer both warranties an have good prices, free shipping.

[RWebb]

"I am going to focus on getting some higher quality lenses"

The lens forms the image.

That is all-important.

A nicer body can help with low light levels etc. But the lens is the thing.

Nikon makes their own glass.

Capiche?