Nikon old vs newer lenses.

[rayonline_nz]

Hi all - I don't have any of the AF-S G lenses. Is one missing out when they only have AF-D's? Some say the older lenses are not that sharp or that the corner are not very good, my wide zoom has a moustache distoration, my primes have bad bokeh. I have a 18-35mm (older one), 50 an 85 1.8's and the (pro!) 35-70 2.8.

Thoughts?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi all - I don't have any of the AF-S G lenses. Is one missing out when they only have AF-D's? Some say the older lenses are not that sharp or that the corner are not very good, my wide zoom has a moustache distoration, my primes have bad bokeh. I have a 18-35mm (older one), 50 an 85 1.8's and the (pro!) 35-70 2.8.

Thoughts?

I yet have to see a comparison old vs new Nikkors but I suspect there will be little to no difference.of courseAF alone can make all the difference in the world,I was never able to beat Nikon's AF systemIt's always spot on with my D700 and 800.

 

[darkosaric]

My friend has a digital full frame nikon, new 50mm f1.4 and old 50mm f2. F2 version is sharper and with less distortion, he says.

 

[Fast14riot]

It's a case by case scenario. The older AI-S manual focus 85/1.8 is sharper than the modern one, the 50/1.8D is very nice and no need to spend more for hardly any improvement. The old Micro Nikkor 55 is arguably the sharpest lens ever made.

However you feel about him and his info, Ken Rockwell has many comparisons of the older vs newer glass on his site. Just remember to read it with an open mind, his info can be quite polarizing in certain circles....


-Xander

 

[rayonline_nz]

I guess the 1.8 AF-D primes are still quite ok and the former pro 35-70. What is your view on the 18-35mm non G? I know with a Nikon AF film camera like my F100 there is the 16-35mm and the 14-24mm? Would I even notice something significant? Stopped down, tripod, printed A4 or A3.

For my FM2N - are the AI/S 20mm and the other primes up to 35mm still quite acceptable? But yeah .. there will be those who argue that the 20mm has now been released with a AF-S G, likewise 24mm, 28mm and 35mm.

 

[gone]

I think the main difference w/ the G lenses vs the older lenses is that Nikon crippled them, and you have to use the camera to adjust aperture, not the lens. They are also cheaper made, at least the ones I owned. When it comes to image quality and good construction, a good rule to go by is that older is better. I have an old non AI Nikkor H 50 2 lens that easily blows away the AF-D 50 1.8 lens I used to have, w/ the latter showing very rough bokeh. About all I could say about the newer lens is that it had AF and more contrast (too much). There's a reason why people are putting older lenses on their newer cameras. Few people are putting newer glass on their older bodies (even if they would work w/ there being no way to set aperture).

The 35 70 2.8 I owned was a good lens. Bit limited on the focal range, and quite heavy and bulky, but I got some good shots from mine. Bokeh wasn't great.

 

[snapguy]

Test

Test the lenses yourself. There is no other way to go. You can't mooch ideas from others to determine what you want. You have to man up and do it yourself. Oh, by the way, bokeh sucks. It's a crutch that bozos use to make them think they can take great photos but most of the time it's "here we go again with that cornball, old fashioned, stereotyped background hocus-focus."

 

[flavio81]

To me AF-S and AF-D lenses are both modern. I also consider AI-S lenses "modern".

For me the "Old" lenses are the Pre-AI lenses. And in general i'd say the Pre-AI lenses have better bokeh overall, while the AI lenses are generally sharper wide open. Of course there are exceptions...

A particular example for me was the Nikkor-Q 200/4.0 lens. It wasn't so sharp and had visible chromatic aberration. But the bokeh was fantastic. I replaced it with the AI 200/4.0 lens which had tremendous sharpness and no CA issues. Bokeh is still good but not as "creamy" as the previous lens.

And the AF lenses are better left aside for journalists or sports shooters.

 

[Xmas]

The ergonomics of the lens are most critical.
Unless employ panf and heavy tripod you won't detect such IQ difference.
An old single coated lens from `60s when you will get more flare mututed colours and softer results.

 

[flavio81]

An old single coated lens from `60s when you will get more flare mututed colours and softer results.

Not always... My single-coated Nikkor-S 50/1.4 is a very high contrast lens with nice color saturation. I have one or two prints made at f1.4 on indoors with light bulbs on top and the contrast is just fine (good).
Even on Marco Cavina's site, when the lens is compared against the AI-S 50/1.4 and other 50 lenses, it holds its own perfectly. In fact in such test it appears with better saturation than the latest AI-S version.

Haven't tested it for flare, however.

 

[Larry H-L]

I'm going to disagree on the 50mm f1.8 D (which I own) vs. the G.

The "G" is a big improvement IMHO, smoother, less harsh looking and better bokeh.

I was stunned at the IQ when one of my students pulled one out and we tried it in the studio on his D300s, a very nice lens for the money.

Now, if only they could bring back the aperture ring....

 

[Vilk]

i use seven AIS primes on both film and full-frame digi; that's all i've got, no AF lenses; looking at results from borrowed AF lenses, i have found no reason to acquire any


the character you will get from each of the first three stops of lenses like 28/2 or 35/1.4--detail, blur, vignette, flare--will be like having three different lenses, not one. a 24-70 just cannot do it. an "upgrade" would be a bit like replacing a ten-pound box full of oils with a ten-pound jar of "brilliant red" acrylic

 

[mweintraub]

I'm going to disagree on the 50mm f1.8 D (which I own) vs. the G.

The "G" is a big improvement IMHO, smoother, less harsh looking and better bokeh.

I was stunned at the IQ when one of my students pulled one out and we tried it in the studio on his D300s, a very nice lens for the money.

Now, if only they could bring back the aperture ring....

I upgraded from both the the 1.4D and 1.8D to the 1.8G. I feel the 1.8G is sharper. Maybe it's the copies of the older lenses I had, but I'm pretty sure the lens is actually sharper.

 

[ritternathan]

For the 50mm, it depends on the aperture. If you shoot mostly open, say 1.4 to 2.8, the 1.4G 50mm is by far the best/sharpest. By the time you get to 5.6, the 1.8D and the 1.4G are equal, though the bokeh of the 1.4G can be pleasant due to the rounded blades. I have both the 1.8D and the 1.4G. I use the 1.8D mostly outside but when there is less light, I use the 1.4G.

 

[480sparky]

As a general rule, the SWMs used for AFing the G lenses are quicker to lock focus since the motor in the lens is designed specifically for that lens. With the older screw-drive D lenses, the 'one-size-fits-all' body motor isn't up to the task in many cases.

 

[mweintraub]

As a general rule, the SWMs used for AFing the G lenses are quicker to lock focus since the motor in the lens is designed specifically for that lens. With the older screw-drive D lenses, the 'one-size-fits-all' body motor isn't up to the task in many cases.

Except the 1.4G focus is horribly slow. The 1.8D on a body like the F5 is amazingly fast.

 

[dynachrome]

There was no 85/1.8 AIS manual focus Nikkor. The F mount manual focus 85 started out as the H. There was then an HC and the 'K' model. Both the AI and AIS lenses were an 85/2. A pre-AI 85/1.8 could be converted to AI either with a factory ring or by filing down part of the back of the aperture ring. I have never seen a pre-AI lens converted to AIS but I suppose it's possible. Differences between lenses having to do with coating show up more in difficult lighting situations. In other situations the benefits of the more modern coating are not as obvious.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The only G lens I have is the 60/2.8 Micro Nikkor - I've used it only on my F4 (shutter priority or program modes). The focus speed, compared to other AF lenses on the F4, was almost instantaneous and telepathic. The very first time using it, inside my house, I thought the lens was broken because I didn't hear it focus. Only afterwards did I realize how quickly and quietly it was focusing.

Looking at Nikon's MTF charts, many G lenses have improvements over the older AF-D lenses. Unfortunately, they don't show MTF curves for the manual focus lenses.

 

[Xmas]

There was no 85/1.8 AIS manual focus Nikkor. The F mount manual focus 85 started out as the H. There was then an HC and the 'K' model. Both the AI and AIS lenses were an 85/2. A pre-AI 85/1.8 could be converted to AI either with a factory ring or by filing down part of the back of the aperture ring. I have never seen a pre-AI lens converted to AIS but I suppose it's possible. Differences between lenses having to do with coating show up more in difficult lighting situations. In other situations the benefits of the more modern coating are not as obvious.

- Milling the ring allows the lens to mount
- the OEM ring seems to have additional metal for the servo control donno
- Milling the registration plate for AIs notch possible
- Fitting a key for max aperture ditto
- altering the aperture to AIs rules difficult
- sticking on or milling 2nd set of aperture settings for finder display possible

But normally you only need a subset, I'm happy with F2 or FM.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

- Milling the ring allows the lens to mount
- the OEM ring seems to have additional metal for the servo control donno
- Milling the registration plate for AIs notch possible
- Fitting a key for max aperture ditto
- altering the aperture to AIs rules difficult
- sticking on or milling 2nd set of aperture settings for finder display possible

But normally you only need a subset, I'm happy with F2 or FM.

very true,even my early AI(1977-1980) is an 85f/2lensgreat lens BTW

 

[narsuitus]

Hi all - I don't have any of the AF-S G lenses.

My Nikon 35mm lens inventory consists primarily of older manual focus prime lenses. I did not begin acquiring newer auto focus zoom lenses until my eyesight began to deteriorate and I began to use the poor viewfinders in digital SLRs.

My 35-70mm f/2.8 AF is very convenient to use but can never be a substitute for my faster 35mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.4 prime lenses when lens speed is needed.

On numerous occasions, I have considered replacing it with the 28-70mm f/2.8 but cannot economically justify it for the slightly wider coverage.

I have also considered replacing it with the 24-70mm f/2.8 G AF but this G lens is not compatible with my Nikon F2 bodies.

https://flic.kr/p/qt4y91

 

[narsuitus]

The 80-200mm f/2.8 D AF-S had image quality equal to my 85mm f/1.8, 105mm f/2.5, and 180mm f/2.8 lenses. It is also equal in image quality to the 70-200mm f/2.8 G AF-S lens but unlike the 70-200 G lens, the 80-200 works on my older Nikon film cameras.

https://flic.kr/p/91JPEC

 

[narsuitus]

I tried to avoid G lenses and DX lenses because I wanted all my lenses to be able to work not only on my digital bodies but also on my auto focus film bodies (F4 and N70) and my older manual focus film bodies (F2). However, one lenses I could not avoid was the 18-55mm f/3.5 to f/5.6 G DX AF that came with one body I purchased. I thought I would never use the lens until I tried it and was impressed with the image quality this inexpensive lens produced. I now use this lens as a backup to my more expensive zoom lenses. However, it is not compatible with any of my 35mm film bodies.

https://flic.kr/p/8XWK8G

 

[narsuitus]

The 14-24mm f/2.8 G AF had image quality that was superior to my 18mm f/3.5 and 24mm f/2 lenses. However, I cannot use it on my Nikon F2 bodies and could only use it in shutter priority mode and program mode on my F4 and N70.

https://flic.kr/p/qbyq31

 

[L Gebhardt]

Hi all - I don't have any of the AF-S G lenses. Is one missing out when they only have AF-D's? Some say the older lenses are not that sharp or that the corner are not very good, my wide zoom has a moustache distoration, my primes have bad bokeh. I have a 18-35mm (older one), 50 an 85 1.8's and the (pro!) 35-70 2.8.

Thoughts?

I was not impressed with the 18-35D. I've replaced it with the 16-35mm and find it much better. However some of the other older lenses are great. I like the newer 85mm G more than the D, but the D lens is still pretty good. But that's just my opinion. Do you find the lenses have issues? If so, try some other options. Just know you might need a more modern film camera to use the newer lenses.