Thinking about autofocus and which way to go

[RDW]

I'm leaning towards the Nikon. While I have no love (and in fact much disdain) for the Big N, the 8008 came with a bunch of AF lenses -- 50/1.4, 28-85, 35-135, 70-210. All good glass if not particularly fast, but the AF 35-70/2.8 is not too terribly expensive. I have to replace the battery case, but it might be just as cost-effective to buy another whole N8008 (or an N8008s) and have mine as a backup. (I don't have a whole lot of interest in upgrading to an N90 or beyond, not when I'm accustomed to $15 Ricohs.)

I have an F801 (aka N8008) somewhere, and the AF is pretty slow and primitive, not much fun to use with anything that moves. An F80/N80 would be much better in this department, and in some respects better than the F90/N90, since it has multi-point AF and the modern control layout. But the F80 is otherwise a step down and doesn't have as good a viewfinder as the other two.

If you were prepared to upgrade, the F100 is in an entirely different league to the N8008, with AF that is still quite competitive today. It also handles much better and is fully compatible with more lenses than any of the others, including AF-S, G, VR and AI lenses, as well as the AF/AF-D lenses you have. About the only things it can't handle are AF-P and electronic aperture 'E' lenses from late in the dSLR era, and ancient pre-AI lenses. The F80 doesn't meter with AI lenses, but otherwise has similar compatibility.

 

[Autonerd]

The answer to that question is "No." The a6000 mount (E-mount) is not the same as the full-frame Sony Alpha mount, nor will the lenses made for APS-C cover 35 mm. Mirrorless cameras also have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance than SLRs.

Oh, DUH. :-/

 

[brian steinberger]

I would recommend the Nikon F100.

 

[Autonerd]

Thanks all -- the conversation is interesting and I hope it continues.

It's funny about weight and quality -- I know that heft doesn't necessarily equal quality, but the heft of those ol' Nikon AFs does feel good in my hand, and it's hard to imagine trading them for what feels like cheaper-made lenses, even if they aren't.

I do know Nikon AF is not the quickest but that's not a huge concern for me. That said, I didn't know about the green light -- that's interesting. I do have a MF 28mm Tokina, and it'll be interesting to see how that works with the N8008.

I had been wondering whether, if I shoot more and more AF, I will want to duplicate the primes I use most (28, 35, 50). Gotta look at the costs for that.

Canon does look intriguing (and I do have an EOS Rebel 2k floating around here somewhere... I owned one when it was new) but I'm not too eager to buy into a new system.

I do need to get a better idea of how many rolls I can expect out of a set of CR2s. AAs will always be around, and cheap. Right now I'm leaning towards the Nikon (slightly better low-light metering, faster top speed, and I have the lenses), but oh, the weight... so far that's the Minolta's biggest advantage, and as a long-time Pentax shooter (of K-, M- and P-series cameras) that is a significant factor.

Aaron

 

[Autonerd]

In the long view, Nikon made the greatest 35mm SLRs. The Nikon F series are head and shoulders above everything else. For manual focus cameras and prime lenses Nikon is king.

I dunno, I own several brands of 35mm MF cameras, including Pentax, Ricoh, Minolta and Nikon, and I don't think the Nikons necessarily stand head and shoulders above the rest, particularly in proportion to their price. An old (broken) FE was one of the things that got me back into film, but the FE never proved to be the love connection I was hoping for. Honestly I prefer my $15 Sears KS Auto, and while I'm not exactly a glasshound, for what I do, I can't see an appreciable difference in image quality between my Nikon AI 50/1.4 and the myriad of Pentax 50/1.7s that seem to multiply like rabbits in my camera bag...

Aaron

 

[Cholentpot]

I dunno, I own several brands of 35mm MF cameras, including Pentax, Ricoh, Minolta and Nikon, and I don't think the Nikons necessarily stand head and shoulders above the rest, particularly in proportion to their price. An old (broken) FE was one of the things that got me back into film, but the FE never proved to be the love connection I was hoping for. Honestly I prefer my $15 Sears KS Auto, and while I'm not exactly a glasshound, for what I do, I can't see an appreciable difference in image quality between my Nikon AI 50/1.4 and the myriad of Pentax 50/1.7s that seem to multiply like rabbits in my camera bag...

Aaron

I have the F, F2, and F3. Each one of them connects strong with me. The Nikkormat not as much and the FG-20 not at all. But the original F lineup is really good. They're not expensive anymore, a steal these days. As for the lenses, generally yes, they're on par. But Nikon made some outstanding lenses. 85 1.8 105 2.0 and the 24 2.8 that I use are outstanding. When they switched over to the E line they were putting out some pretty good stuff for decent prices. The 100 2.8 E is an excellent lens for what it is.

I'd agree with others, the N80/F80 is the way to go. It's the only autofocus Nikon I have that feels good to use and fun to take out. It's light and affordable. You can get a battery grip for it that takes AA.

 

[Les Sarile]

Thanks all -- the conversation is interesting and I hope it continues.

It's funny about weight and quality -- I know that heft doesn't necessarily equal quality, but the heft of those ol' Nikon AFs does feel good in my hand, and it's hard to imagine trading them for what feels like cheaper-made lenses, even if they aren't.

I do know Nikon AF is not the quickest but that's not a huge concern for me. That said, I didn't know about the green light -- that's interesting. I do have a MF 28mm Tokina, and it'll be interesting to see how that works with the N8008.

I had been wondering whether, if I shoot more and more AF, I will want to duplicate the primes I use most (28, 35, 50). Gotta look at the costs for that.

Canon does look intriguing (and I do have an EOS Rebel 2k floating around here somewhere... I owned one when it was new) but I'm not too eager to buy into a new system.

I do need to get a better idea of how many rolls I can expect out of a set of CR2s. AAs will always be around, and cheap. Right now I'm leaning towards the Nikon (slightly better low-light metering, faster top speed, and I have the lenses), but oh, the weight... so far that's the Minolta's biggest advantage, and as a long-time Pentax shooter (of K-, M- and P-series cameras) that is a significant factor.

Aaron

You might consider quality modern zoom lenses instead of the primes as they are not like the zooms of old.

 

[Autonerd]

I have the F, F2, and F3.

Well that could explain it, as I don't have a straight-up F -- my Nikons (beside the N8008) are FE, FG and Nikomat FT2. Truth be told, that FG is actually one of closet favorites. I understand why the Nikonisti don't care for it, but it's a nice alternative to the Pentax Ms.

Aaron

 

[Autonerd]

You might consider quality modern zoom lenses instead of the primes as they are not like the zooms of old.

Agreed -- I have no problem with optical quality, it's the speed of the primes I like. And being a creature of habit, I tend to gravitate towards certain focal lengths. My digicam is a Sony a6000 and I use an 18-55 zoom -- and when I look at EXIF, I tend to automatically shoot at the equivalents (pardon the word) of 28, 50 and zoomed-all-the-way-out (85ish). Back in The Day I only had a 28, 50 and 70-210, so I guess old habits die hard.

Aaron

 

[Cholentpot]

Well that could explain it, as I don't have a straight-up F -- my Nikons (beside the N8008) are FE, FG and Nikomat FT2. Truth be told, that FG is actually one of closet favorites. I understand why the Nikonisti don't care for it, but it's a nice alternative to the Pentax Ms.

Aaron

The manual F's are in a league of their own.

 

[pthornto]

One thing to think about is if you don’t like how a camera or set of lenses feels in hand, your less likely to pick it up and when you do it won’t be fun to use. Not a recipe for making good pics imo. It’s a real personal thing for sure. I have Canon for af and agree it is a super system but like the rebel or elan a lot less than my eos 3- this is mostly a size/feel thing and also a bit of a better viewfinder thing. So if you disdain your Nikons it could just be you haven’t found the right Nikon.

There is a size weight penalty for the higher end bodies, but this is made up for in great handling. So more of a great cam for having in hand to use all day versus one to walk around with or take on a plane, etc.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I own a few autofocus/auto-wind 35mm SLRs, including a Nikon N8008 and Minolta Maxxum 5, 5000 and 400si. I don't use them much because I find them a bit boring -- but the older I get, the more I realize I need the assistance that autofocus provides.

Last weekend I brought out my N8008 for some snapshots at a wedding. Alas, its got some battery-corrosion issues (first owner left it for 10+ years with batteries in -- what a mess!) and while it has worked in the past, I couldn't get it to stay on reliably. Wound up shooting with my K2 (and hopefully I didn't screw up the focus too badly...).

Still, that got me to thinking that maybe it's time to do a but more auto-focus shooting, see if I can get myself to like it a bit better.

The question is: Which system to get behind?

I'm leaning towards the Nikon. While I have no love (and in fact much disdain) for the Big N, the 8008 came with a bunch of AF lenses -- 50/1.4, 28-85, 35-135, 70-210. All good glass if not particularly fast, but the AF 35-70/2.8 is not too terribly expensive. I have to replace the battery case, but it might be just as cost-effective to buy another whole N8008 (or an N8008s) and have mine as a backup. (I don't have a whole lot of interest in upgrading to an N90 or beyond, not when I'm accustomed to $15 Ricohs.)

Then there's the Maxxum 5, which I think is the most technically advanced camera I own. Problem is, I only have kit lenses, so I'd need more, and it seems like it'd get pretty expensive to recreate what I already have for the Nikon (presumably because Sony uses the same format -- though I wonder if the 18-55 from my Sony 6000 works on the Maxxum 5? Hmmm). Also I'm concerned about the burn rate on CR2 batteries (the Nikon uses AAs). That said, the light weight of the Minolta sure would be welcome, and no worries about backup bodies since M5s are cheap and easy to find in like-new condition.

Despite my anti-Nikon bias, I can't help but think that when one has the option to go Nikon, one should go Nikon. Still, Minolta's a strong underdog.

Yet another option is stick with my Pentaxian ways and invest in a Pentax system -- though I'd be starting from scratch, and I'm not looking to spend a ton o' money. While I know a lot about Ks and Ms and Ps, I know very little about autofocus Pentax 35mm cameras.

Photrians, what do you think?

Aaron

Nikon ; what else is there in such abundance

 

[ph]

sirs,

I only have experience with canon 5dII, Nikon Z7, a small Sony something and leitz X2 autofocus and dislike all of them .

With manual focus ( plus spot metering)(especially withe the Z7 enlargement feature and marginally with the leitz picture in picture enlargement) one can actually get exactly what one wishes sharp amd correctly exposed rather than the nearest twig or a distant hill. The Z has an unfortunate tendency to move the focus point , requiring annoying button pressing. Altogether autofocus is fine for snapshots under controlled circumstances or if in a hurry, but otherwise best avoided.

p.

 

[Don_ih]

Altogether autofocus is fine for snapshots under controlled circumstances or if in a hurry, but otherwise best avoided.

Except that the point of this thread is that @Autonerd said the older he gets, the more he needs the assistance autofocus provides.

 

[guangong]

My only autofocus camera is Contax T3, so I have no opinions or experience regarding autofocus cameras in use. However, I would like to suggest that instead of discussing cameras, attention should turn to the eyes. Perhaps a trip to a competent optometrist would be a better investment. Also, cataracts creep up unawares, degrading vision bit by bit. Or replacing spectacles with contact lenses. A trip to doctor would be cheaper than a new camera system.
I can see a practical application for auto focusing with sports photography, etc, so I’m not against it, only never felt need for it.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I've been wailing away at this photo thing for three decades now and one thing that is for certain is Canon has had the best autofocus technology by far the entire time. Nikon and others tried to catch up but Canon was always first. That said, I think since you already own some decent Nikon lenses I'd get an N80 if I were you. It is a nice camera and capable, plus it is super cheap these days. I bought one for $17. I also have an N90 and I do like it more than the N80 but the N80 is a better camera.

Just to throw this out there, but for overall character I like Minolta autofocus lenses. They are the most Leica-like of any autofocus lenses I've ever used. I keep a Minolta 9xi around just to take those old Minolta lenses out every now and then. I wouldn't recommend getting them though. Technology is way past it's date.

I owned a Nikon F2 years ago and i wasn't that impressed with it. Too clunky. Plus it is the only camera I ever ruined. I dropped it one foot onto a floor and it caved in the side and jammed it up. Not impressive.

 

[Autonerd]

However, I would like to suggest that instead of discussing cameras, attention should turn to the eyes. Perhaps a trip to a competent optometrist would be a better investment. Also, cataracts creep up unawares, degrading vision bit by bit.

A good point. I've been wearing glasses since age 8 (and contacts since 18) and I think it's just the ordinary loss of close-in focus. I can still see the microprisms (which I prefer to split-rings, force of habit) but it just takes me a wee bit longer to get everything done than it used to!

Aaron

 

[Autonerd]

I think since you already own some decent Nikon lenses I'd get an N80 if I were you.

Well now, that is an interesting prospect. My one concern is the cost of the batteries, same as the Minolta. Maybe that's grist for another thread, how long those bateries go.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Well now, that is an interesting prospect. My one concern is the cost of the batteries, same as the Minolta. Maybe that's grist for another thread, how long those bateries go.

They don't cost that much if you buy them ten or so at a time. Amazon.

 

[foc]

I shot professionally for 20 years using Canon EOS cameras and I found autofocus to be 99.9% accurate and foolproof BUT only with the L series of lenses. (professional wide aperture lenses).

If you can afford the investment, it will be well worth it.

If you don't need speed with AF and don't mind the odd shunting/hunting for focus, then try some of the other brands with the cheaper lenses.

 

[Paul Howell]

In Minolta AF world, 7000, takes 3 AAA.