Nikon 20/2.8 AF "D" or no "D"?

[brian steinberger]

I just won a very nice Nikkor 20/2.8 AF off of ebay for a very reasonable price. After looking closer at the pictures, I realized that it is not the "D" version. I understand that the D version Nikkor's are for flash calculations. I have an F4 and an F100, so the D will do me no good on the F4 anyway.

I guess I just need reassurance that the optics are identical between the two. I've read threads where some posters believe the newer D versions are optically better. Is the flash distance chip the only difference between the two types?

 

[kodachrome64]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry 8300: BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

I believe it is also used for autofocus. They are not optically identical AFAIK.

 

[Poohblah]

they are optically identical, but there might be a coating difference between the two.
I had a website that listed every Nikon lens ever and its info, and all the lenses that were optically identical were grouped together. Unfortunately I can't find the link right now.

 

[brian steinberger]

I just found some info stating that the design for the 20/2.8 AF non-D was taken from the old AI manual focus design, a lens that many photographers rave about, including Galen Rowell. I did see that the newer "D" version had some auto focus updates as kodachrome64 stated. This is also not important to me.

But I still haven't found any information as to whether the newer "D" lens is optically better. This is what I'm concerned about.

 

[Smudger]

Nikon Lenses specifications..

Poohblah -this may be the site you were thinking of :
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html
Roland Vink is the expert.
Essential reading for any Nikonista.

 

[brian steinberger]

Poohblah -this may be the site you were thinking of :
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html
Roland Vink is the expert.
Essential reading for any Nikonista.

It appears from this site that the lenses are exactly the same, at least with the specs he gave. This does not give coating specs though.

 

[Poohblah]

I found the link, it's hosted on the same site but appears to be slightly different from the one you gave...?
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html

 

[Smudger]

Roland Vink..

Yep,and there's another page that ends with..serialno.html
All worth a peruse.

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

Hello,

Unless you're shooting flash it doesn't matter anyway - the "D" is a coding index for flash photography computations.

Even then it's not a major issue.
I have shot "D" and non-"D" lenses on the F5, the D1H and D2H with various appropriate Nikon flashes and haven't noticed enough variation to warrant the exaggerated cost difference.

I always considered it one more way Nikon got established users to buy more lenses - they did it by eliminating matrix metering with non-AF lenses with the F5 (even though they worked fine on the F4) and then a few years later, everyone was supposed to buy "D" lenses to improve their flash photography (personally, I got great shots with the F4 and SB-24).

I always buy non-"D" lenses when I have the choice. The cost difference makes it a no brainer.

 

[André E.C.]

Only flash photography? What about metering itself?

The fantastic 3D Matrix Metering only operates with optics equiped with the D chip on them, you said it's only for flash?:confused:

Let's not forget the first years of the 90's when Nikon was in big trouble developing cameras (the update of the F4 took ages), and was precisely the refinement of their metering technology who kept them afloat.

I agree D optics are crucial for flash photography but not only that, they are fantastic calculating the "correct" exposure using Nikons database.

Do you use it or not? That's another ball game, but let's not underrate a first class and inovative step in metering technology.



André