Sigma HSM lenses

[PoohBearGS]

If we consider the major down side of the Nikon D40 to be that you can only use autofocus with lenses that have an autofocus motor within the lens, does the fact that Sigma has the HSM line take some of that problem away? I plan to get the D40 (as an upgrade from a point-and-shoot) because my budget doesn't allow for the D40x or the D80 (although if I get more into photography, I may eventually upgrade to the D80 or whatever it's equivalent is when the time to upgrade comes). Does anyone use the Sigma HSM lenses with a D40 or D40x? And what do you think?

 

[Big Mike]

I'm not knowledgeable about Nikon lenses...or those compatible with Nikon...but I believe that Sigma HSM lenses are different from non-HSM lenses in the type of AF motor that they have...not whether they have a motor.

Canon, for example has EF lenses that are USM and some that are not USM. Both have AF motors though. USM is ultra sonic motor...which is similar to Sigma's HSM. The USM/HSM is a better style of motor that is faster and quieter than the standard motor.

 

[Don Simon]

I think Canon is the exception there. AFAIK, all Sigma's non-HSM lenses do not have motors in the lens and rely on a motor in the camera body (the rotating "screwdriver" on the lens mount)... just like Nikon lenses other than AF-S ones. The HSM ones, like the AF-S ones, do have motors in the lens and therefore will autofocus on the D40. So yes, buying Sigma HSM lenses is one way to get around that problem.

 

[Garbz]

With the exception that Canon does not have a motor in the body but always in the lens. If what you're saying is right ZaphodB then I don't think non HSM sigmas would work on Canon bodies.

AFAIK Nikon is the only one who started with their motors in the body. Didn't Canon always have them in the lenses?

 

[Don Simon]

Actually I think Canon is the only one who didn't start with motors in the body ... Nikon, Pentax and Minolta all went for the in-body system.

Just to confuse things further, all of Sigma's lenses, even those without HSM, are available for Canon, and seem to autofocus.
I assume Sigma still use in-lens micromotors for their non-HSM lenses for the Canon mount...
otherwise, I need to go lie down to stop my head exploding.

 

[WDodd]

Didn't Canon always have them in the lenses?

As far as I know any camera that is part of the 'EOS' system has it in the lenses.

 

[JamesD]

Yeah, all of Canon's EOS lenses have motors in the lens (except for a couple which I believe are manual focus, such as tilt-shift lenses).

I thought one of the benefits of Nikon was the ability to use any Nikon lens ever made with a current camera? Or is it just that you can mount them on any modern Nikon camera? I freely admit my ignorance of Nikon technical details... I've always been a Canon user.

Funny how once you spend money on one brand, you wind up stuck with it because it costs to much to try something else?

 

[Don Simon]

AFAIK you can mount and use any Nikon lens since the 70s (I think earlier ones require a modification if they work at all) on a modern camera, but with some cameras you won't be able to take advantage of focusing and metering features. Like the D40 not having autofocus with all non-AF-S lenses.

I think you get more compatibility going the other way, i.e. being able to use any modern lens (if it has an aperture ring) on older Nikon cameras. Of course I could be wrong there as well. You also get lens/body compatibility going back to the 70s with Pentax... of course, whether it's a real benefit is debatable and Canon users probably wouldn't agree, since they have more choice of new lenses and can mount old Nikon ones with an adapter anyway

 

[Garbz]

The D40 doesn't have an auto index ring either IIRC. You need a D type lens on those which rules out lenses earlier than then 90s. With the D70 and above you can mount any lens back to and including AI nikkors, except some PC nikkors.