| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
|||||||
| AF 70-300 lenses - Page 1 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Sat Mar 9th, 2019 13:40 |
|
1st Post |
chrisbet
|
Is there a significant difference in performance comparing an AF D lens with an AF-S G lens? I note that the earlier D lens is Japanese made while the G lens is chinese - are they the same quality?
____________________ If it is broken it was probably me .... |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Mar 9th, 2019 14:07 |
|
2nd Post |
jk
|
Optically I dont think so but for speed of focus acquisition very much so. People get snobbish about Chinese v. Thailand v. Japan made lenses. They are made to a quality standard. Nikon is not a mickey mouse manufacturer and produces some of the highest quality lenses just like Canon, Fuji (who make for Hasselblad), Leica, etc. I never understand why Leica lenses are so highly regarded as it is their design not the manufacturing process that is superior.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Mar 9th, 2019 17:04 |
|
3rd Post |
Eric
|
In my experience AFD lenses are more likely to exhibit colour fringing than AF-S equivalents. But the main advantage was the AF-S versions were faster and more assured at focusing. Of course that's a generalisation as I only experienced a limited lens set. The AF-S 70-300 is a good lens at a very good price. Being an FX lens you get 105-450mm on a DX body.
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Sat Mar 9th, 2019 17:44 |
|
4th Post |
chrisbet
|
Thanks for that - I'll keep an eye out for a good priced example of the AF-S 70-300.
____________________ If it is broken it was probably me .... |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 10:08 |
|
5th Post |
chrisbet
|
Eric wrote:The AF-S 70-300 is a good lens at a very good price. Being an FX lens you get 105-450mm on a DX body. They seem to be going for around £200 on fleabay. I assume that the DX lenses give their rated focal length on a DX body?
____________________ If it is broken it was probably me .... |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 11:01 |
|
6th Post |
jk
|
No the focal length on both FX and FX are the focal length of the lens. The apparent difference is due to the difference in sensor size. A FX has more area to capture the image than a DX and the DX provides a crop of the FX image of 1.5x which gives and apparent focal length equivalent increase of x1.5
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 12:21 |
|
7th Post |
Robert
|
chrisbet wrote:They seem to be going for around £200 on fleabay. As JK says, the focal length of all lenses is as stated on the lenses. Nikons DX lenses have a smaller image circle, (cheaper to produce). They can be used on FX bodies but the FX body will switch it's sensor to DX area by default, if you disable that you get extreme vignetting outside the DX image area. That's it. Some DX zooms do go some way to filling the FX sensor at the wide end I believe but I have never experimented. Using an FX lens on a DX body has the advantage of better edge and corner sharpness because that's where all lenses tend to have some limitations and with an FX lens on a DX body you don't get to see the corners of the image circle, which in part causes the vignetting. With the exception of the Sigma 10-20 which I no longer have and the 18-105 which I keep for IR, all my lenses are FX and have been since I got my D1 in 2006, I decided the DX was a temporary expedient until Nikon figured how to make full size sensors. So I bought my lenses with that in mind. The DX format does have some advantages but also drawbacks, better for long lenses, as Eric points out but far worse for wides. To get a serious wide you have to go to silly short lenses, with the accompanying distortion and other issues. After the D3 I find using a DX camera like looking at the world though a keyhole, which I tolerate if I have to but it's not my preference. As they say, your experience may vary!
____________________ Robert. |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 12:38 |
|
8th Post |
chrisbet
|
As they say, your experience may vary! Lol - I have a DX only because it is my first Nikon digital camera ( purely film before that) and I wanted something cheap to start with - yes I would love a D5 or Z7 but my pocket won't stretch there and I couldn't really justify it! 
____________________ If it is broken it was probably me .... |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 13:00 |
|
9th Post |
jk
|
Nothing wrong with DX even though I do think that Nikon under-resources it as a format. I think that a D500 (very fast AF) is ideal for sport and wildlife but the lesser D5xxx and D3xxx cameras have good sensors and AF but lag behind the D500. The D7xxx series cameras are beautifully specified but lack a little on the AF compared with the D500. FX brings some advances but is by no means a panacea. The lenses are heavier and more expensive. The D850 is a heavy camera compared to the Z7 or Z6 but has some advantages but these are small and personal preferences. In the future there are rumors of a Z1 which is a D6 in Z7 clothes of a professional Z7. It may be what some need with a bigger/better battery but in truth I can see it is what I need.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Tue Mar 12th, 2019 15:55 |
|
10th Post |
GeoffR
|
Robert wrote:As JK says, the focal length of all lenses is as stated on the lenses. Soon after getting my first D3 I was in Cornwall with the D3, D2Xs Sigma 28-70 f2.8 and a Nikon 17-55 f2.8 plus a 70-200. After about one day I discovered that the Sigma was producing exposure errors on zooming. That left me little choice but to use the 17-55 on the D3. This worked well as long as I kept the focal length above about 24. For the rest of the trip I managed with 24-55. So some DX lenses do work on FX but others, I suspect, don't.
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 1682 Current time is 03:23 | Page: 1 2 3 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > AF 70-300 lenses | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0658 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 83 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0658 seconds (67% database + 33% PHP). 83 queries executed.