Nikon and lenses that don't autofocus.

T

trencheel303

Messages
4,888
Edit My Images
No
no longer required
 
Last edited:
It's so they can make the bodies smaller and cheaper, and also attract a feature/price premium to their higher end bodies. If you want a Nikon that focusses AF lens then it's a D90 or higher...

However Nikon's range of AF-S lenses is so wide ranging and good now that anyone buying a dSLR without AF motor has a huge choice of lenses to get.
 
Not really sure, it was one of the things that put me off when i was looking into what system to go for though!

I'd imagine it's because....... actually I literally can't think of a reason. Got to be to save money somewhere and increase profits somewhere else, or they wouldn't do it!
 
Because no one would buy the mid range DSLR's, also it's cheaper and lighter to make them without. Hence why entry level cameras don't have as many features. Simple economies of scale.
 
I expect Nikon's thinking is also that a D40/60/3000/5000 user is unlikely to be trawling eBay for old AF lenses when he/she can go and get a 55-200/vr or 70-300/vr for not alot of money from Jessops and the like.

However I do trawl eBay for older AF and even older AI-S lenses so the old D300s is perfect for this!
 
I don't think it's right to villanise Nikon over the decision to keep AF motors out of the entry-level bodies - it's a choice that may polarise opinion (and I'm of the opinion that I'd rather have the motor...), but it's a legitimate choice and when you have a D3000 or D60, etc in your hands it is impressively smaller than a D90.

If you're going to buy a cheap DX camera, chances are a small and cheap, light DX lens is a better choice rather than an older, more expensive and heavier FX lens. Nearly all DX lenses have AF-S, so it's usually a moot point.
 
trencheel303 said:
I thought as much. So basically it's exactly what Apple do; sell something stripped of features for a price that doesn't reflect it but sell it on style and usability, and 'being better than the other product'. Dear oh dear oh dear.
Click to expand...

Thats a very cynical way of looking at it. I think there is a not unreasonable assumption from Nikon that most people buying one of their entry level bodies will only be interested in the newer range of AF-S lens (mostly the kit lens) and so they may as well save the cost and weight of the AF motor, I suspect only the weight saving is passed on though.

Of course this is self fufiling
 
To keep body prices down. Trap the unwary into the AF-S route with the attendant higher prices of lenses. Weight might play a small part but then the AF-S lenses are heavier than their screw-driven counterparts. Might also be to stop new users getting into buying older, cheaper 2nd hand lenses.

Just having a brief compare of a D?0 body and a 50mm lens.

D5000, £469
50mm f/1.4 AF-S, £269

Total £738.

D90, £617
50mm f/1.4 AF-D, £199 (2nd hand)

Total £816.

Add a couple more lenses and that D90's starting to look quite good value compared to the D5000, isn't it?
 
Nod said:
To keep body prices down. Trap the unwary into the AF-S route with the attendant higher prices of lenses. Weight might play a small part but then the AF-S lenses are heavier than their screw-driven counterparts. Might also be to stop new users getting into buying older, cheaper 2nd hand lenses.

Just having a brief compare of a D?0 body and a 50mm lens.

D5000, £469
50mm f/1.4 AF-S, £269

Total £738.

D90, £617
50mm f/1.4 AF-D, £199 (2nd hand)

Total £816.

Add a couple more lenses and that D90's starting to look quite good value compared to the D5000, isn't it?
Click to expand...


you're not comparing like with like - they new version of the 50 f.14 to the old version(& 2nd hand into the deal) for example

I also think that the majority of d5000 users are likely to use the kit lens and not alot else (I may be wrong). The D90 was also Nikon's biggest seller last year
 
Most people at the lower price ranges tend to be interested in HSM/usm/whatever type lenses anyway (due to advertising/magazines?), therefore the motor in the body is generally a moot point for them.

An opinion formed by me for me and not necessarily for general consumption!

Nick.
 
dont knoiw why folk get bothered about this, I have a D90 and D60, and only the 50 f1.8 doesnt have a motor, but the D60 has a rangefinder so its not hard to manual focus. HSM lenses are made in volume so in reality are no more expensive if buying new.
 
Never understood the fuss as all Canon lenses have to have inbuilt focus motors to autofocus anyway.

I've had both (Canon/Nikon) so no axe to grind, it is just not a problem in my opinion.
 
trencheel303 said:
Why do certain Nikon bodies not have an autofocus motor, meaning one has to buy lenses with one builtin if they wish to use autofucus? It seems a bit pointless to me, rather like how Apple don't put an eject button on CD drives.

Can someone explain to me, without setting me on fire please, why this is?
Click to expand...
There is a lot of history and 'legacy' issues you are not considering - Nikon have been making 35mm SLR's and lenses since the early 60's and this had grown into prolific range of manual and autofocus lenses for 'amateur' and pro 35mm film cameras by the 90's. And remember - they did not dump an entire lens mount system as Canon did when they dropped FD for EF - Nikon could make autofocus lenses work with their original mount and that kept a legion of Nikon users very happy indeed....

Then digital came - but as the sensors were smaller than 35mm so the lens designers had an opportunity to make new lighter, smaller, cheaper lenses that would specifically suit DX cameras. This grew into a range of lenses for 'pro' and enthusiast use.

Now Nikon make FX digital bodies and make these work with their older lenses but some of the 'cheaper' bodies only work with the lenses designed of for them. But you buy a 'beginner' camera and learn how to use it. You get a few lenses the once you've got 'into' photography you are persuaded to move up-market you get to buy the lenses from them all over again. They make more profit - which is what they are really in business for.

But why is a Canon owner bothered? :shrug: (And Macs don't need an 'eject' button on the CD drive - it's on the keyboard.)
 
trencheel303 said:
Not 'bothered' per se just curious.
Click to expand...
If you are bothered that some Nikon lenses don't work well on some (cheaper) bodies now just be glad you were not deep into Canons when EF lenses were introduced.
trencheel303 said:
As for the eject button thing, I'm aware it's on the keyboard... but my view to that is similar to this new wave of automobiles that no longer have a 'key'.
Click to expand...
I suspect the 'eject' button on your CD drive is still an electronic switch - not a mechanical release. No different in principle at all.
 
trencheel303 said:
Not 'bothered' per se just curious. As for the eject button thing, I'm aware it's on the keyboard... but my view to that is similar to this new wave of automobiles that no longer have a 'key'. :bonk:
Click to expand...

as an aside they don't have a key cos of health and safety gone mad - EURO Ncap says that if you have a key you can get a nasty cut on your leg from it in a crash
 
reading the "Nikon D40 Field Guide" today

author made a [tongue in cheek?] remark that when the D40 was brought out, none of the competition non-motor lens would work.......crafty or what..:nono:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top