Are Nikon AF-S lenses okay?

CameraFun

I might be able to get a lower end body d40x for cheap but it comes with good lenses. I know the d40x has not motor so it requires the af-s with built in lens motor. I plan on upgrading the body but keeping the lenses. If I have only AF-S lenses am I limiting myself somehow? I believe they work with the D90 and D7000 don't they?

Thanks.

Qarik

you are not limiting yourself wrt to image quality. you are limiting yourself to variety. I think nikon is only putting out af-s lens now and so you will miss out on some older lens. it's really not a big deal.

CameraFun

Qarik wrote: »

you are not limiting yourself wrt to image quality. you are limiting yourself to variety. I think nikon is only putting out af-s lens now and so you will miss out on some older lens. it's really not a big deal.

so on something like the d7000 does it somehow just "know" the lens has a motor in it and not to try and use its internal body motor?

cab.in.boston

Any and all new autofocus Nikon lenses are AF-S, including all their pro lineup (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, etc), except for older lenses that may still be in production (50 f/1.8D... anything that has "D" in the name). If you go with a body without the screw drive, you are limiting yourself in that you won't be able to autofocus older lenses, which sometimes can be found used for good prices. But as for "limiting" yourself to AF-S lenses, no, you'll be able to find very good lenses that are AF-S. Other manufacturers make lenses that are compatible with non-screw drive bodies, like Sigma's HSM and Tamron's and Tokina's built-in motor lenses.

There are some AF-S lenses that are top notch, others that are more entry level, so the fact that they're AF-S doesn't mean as much as which particular AF-S lenses they are. For instance, I have the AF-S DX 55-200mm f/4-5.6 VR. It's a rather cheap telephoto zoom and is okay for the money, but in no way compares to the AF-S 70-200 f/2.8.

But the simple answer to your question is no, there is nothing inherently limiting about AF-S lenses.

cab.in.boston

CameraFun wrote: »

so on something like the d7000 does it somehow just "know" the lens has a motor in it and not to try and use its internal body motor?

Yes, the lenses have microchips in them that communicate with the body.

Matthew Saville

Yeah, it's the D40X that will be limiting, not the AF-S lenses you buy. The reason you buy AF-D lenses is for shooting with older film cameras, or simply for getting a deal on a cheaper lens. (85mm f/1.8 D instead of the Nikon or Sigma AFS / HSM lenses...)

But if you plan on eventually upgrading to a D7000, then that issue will go away.

Enjoy buying! :-)

=Matt=

borrowlenses.com

Every lens Nikon has made in the past few years has been AF-S. All their best glass is AF-S as well.

Cygnus Studios

borrowlenses.com wrote: »

All their best glass is AF-S as well.

Wow, that is a mighty powerful statement, but I have to disagree.

The Nikon AF Nikkor 14mm f2.8D is a mighty fine piece of glass. The 24mm and 28mm F2.8 are also pretty darn good. The 35mm F2.0 also has to rank up there near the best made. The 85mm F1.4 is considered pretty good also.

I am not saying that some of the AF-S isn't really good, but the best???

borrowlenses.com

The 14mm is good but the 14-24 f/2.8 is better. Actually, we will make one stipulation - the 50mm AF-S is slower focusing than the AF D version, but otherwise if we had to choose between those lenses you listed and their "G" versions with AF-S we would take the G versions.

Cygnus Studios

borrowlenses.com wrote: »

The 14mm is good but the 14-24 f/2.8 is better.

That's not really a fair comparison, nothing I have found is better than the 14-24mm

borrowlenses.com

cygnus studios wrote: »

that's not really a fair comparison, nothing i have found is better than the 14-24mm :d

Haha, yeah it's pretty incredible.

Joves

Cygnus Studios wrote: »

Wow, that is a mighty powerful statement, but I have to disagree.

The Nikon AF Nikkor 14mm f2.8D is a mighty fine piece of glass. The 24mm and 28mm F2.8 are also pretty darn good. The 35mm F2.0 also has to rank up there near the best made. The 85mm F1.4 is considered pretty good also.

I am not saying that some of the AF-S isn't really good, but the best???

I tend to agree with you.
You can use any of Nikons lenses even if they are not AF-S, it is just you will have to manually focus. Supossedly the green dot on the left in the view finder will tell you when it is in focus by lighting up. There are many fine AI and AI-S lenses as well. You may also lose metering. BTW the AI lenses have to be manually focused on the cameras with in body motors as well. Also all of the models without motors can use pretty much all of Nikons older glass without damage to the cameras because they dont have the motor.

Tim Kamppinen

Cygnus Studios wrote: »

Wow, that is a mighty powerful statement, but I have to disagree.

The Nikon AF Nikkor 14mm f2.8D is a mighty fine piece of glass. The 24mm and 28mm F2.8 are also pretty darn good. The 35mm F2.0 also has to rank up there near the best made. The 85mm F1.4 is considered pretty good also.

I am not saying that some of the AF-S isn't really good, but the best???

The 24, 35, and 85 have all been reincarnated as 1.4 AF-S G lenses... which according to the reviews I have seen all surpass the D versions. And the 14-24 is legendary... even Canon shooters use it! (with an adapter)

jonh68

Cygnus Studios wrote: »

Wow, that is a mighty powerful statement, but I have to disagree.

The Nikon AF Nikkor 14mm f2.8D is a mighty fine piece of glass. The 24mm and 28mm F2.8 are also pretty darn good. The 35mm F2.0 also has to rank up there near the best made. The 85mm F1.4 is considered pretty good also.

I am not saying that some of the AF-S isn't really good, but the best???

Its a pretty safe assumption to say the afs version of a lens compared to the non-afs brother is better. In nikon's case, there may not be a afs version though as the prime lineup is getting the afs treatment.