What Nikon?

Very hard in the digital age.

The newer and newer digital cameras have worse and worse viewfinders. Using a manual lens on most digital cameras is like plucking the smallest of hairs with tweezers. Every time you think you have it, that was just the shadow and you missed the hair!

Unfortunately as we moved into the auto focus digital era there was little need for manual focusing, so the prism splitting the light between the viewfinder and the sensor puts more light on the sensor and substantially less on the viewfinder.

I don't know numbers for sure, but last I had heard it was about 10% of all light going into the viewfinder while the rest hits the sensor. Older film cameras had about 50 / 50 split.

You can get around auto focusing if you are shooting stills or things that are just easy to focus around, however people, animals, cars, it will be difficult since there is very little help manually focusing.
 
yea I think I would really need the auto focus. Kids are hard enough as it is with autofocus
 
i started with the d3000 myself, recently upgraded to the d90 and it was the perfect choice! but like everyone else has stated, there are a lot of options :) good luck!
 
Interesting that you make this thread/mention this. I am actually considering on upgrading from a d3000 to a d90 myself as well for similar reasons.
 
My Nikon SLR is an aperture priority, non auto focus camera. If you have good eyes it's not a big deal BUT it has different type of focusing screen. I am still getting used to the focusing screen in my DSLR and I miss the other focusing screen. I could never focus any lens really fast with it so unless I was really lucky, I couldn't take quick shots but it made accurate focusing great. Manual focus is really where you want to be if you are looking to be have really sharp photos. For me, the auto features are good for not having to think about things - just point and shoot. I do find myself using auto focusing for snapshots and use manual focus for when I want to be more artistic.

I do have a 50mm lens for my other Nikon that I used infrequently as I preferred the zoom and I never got into portrait work to use it a lot.

It is compatible but not autofocus.

how hard is it to not have autofocus?
 
I started with a D40 and found myself really wanting that 50mm f1.8 prime, but was not real happy about not being able to use auto focus. The next time I found myself with some extra cash, I sold the D40 and bought a D90. While I liked the D40 a lot, I LOVE the D90. The AF motor in-body is why I bought the camera, but it turns out that the commander mode (which I use with the SB-600) was worth the price alone. Getting the flash off camera makes all the difference. Not to mention all the extra buttons for your setting changing convenience ;-)
 
I can not get the regular 50mm because the auto focus is in the lens, making the lens so expensive, I'd rather just upgrade cameras and get the non AF-S lens.
The lens is not more expensive only because it has a focus motor in it.


It is more expensive because it has
  • better build quality
  • better lens coatings
  • a wider aperture
  • and more lens elements that give a better final image.
Most of the AF lenses cost more than their AF-S consumer grade counterpart:

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G - $200 ......... AF NIKKOR 35mm f/2D - $390

AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR - $200 ......... AF Zoom-NIKKOR 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF-ED - $670

AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED - $250 ........ AF Zoom-NIKKOR 80-200mm f/2.8D ED - $1225

AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED - $460 ........ AF Zoom-NIKKOR 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF - $745
 
wow thanks for sharing that!

I had no idea!

This gives me something to think about!!! arghhhh!

So many choices!
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top