Having trouble metering with new lens

So I'm a photography newb. I have an entry level Nikon d3400 and after investigating macro lenses in my budget I purchased a Tamron SP Di AF 90mm Macro Lens 2.8. I was fully aware that Auto Focus would not work but that the lens would function normally anyway. However, when I attach the lens, the light meter is absent. Also, when I put the aperture dial on the smallest setting (as per the instruction manual instructed) I could adjust the aperture via the camera body, which it also failed to do. Can someone help me trouble shoot this, especially the absence of the light meter?

Sounds like maybe the electrical contacts on the lens are not making good contact with the ones on the camera. Try seeing if any of them are dirty. If so, try cleaning them with a pencil eraser.

I believe that unlike the D3300 and those before, the D3400 does not meter with any lens, including older AF lenses, that has an aperture ring.

 

If you look at the lens mount from the front, at about the 8:00 position you should see a little switch that is pushed down when the aperture ring is locked into its minimum position. If that switch is not there, the lens will be treated as a manual lens and not metered, with a "lens not mounted" notice in any mode but manual.

 

 

This is a D3200. On this model, if a chipped lens with an aperture ring is not locked to minimum aperture, it cannot be used at all, even manually, but it meters when it's locked.

Have you read the lens compatibility list in the manual?

 

The Tamron is effectively an AF-D lens.

It's page 80 of the PDF manual.

 

As I suspected, the D3400 no longer meters with any lens that has an aperture ring. The lens in question will still operate, but will need to be treated as a fully manual lens, and metered either by guesswork and chimping the histogram after a shot, or by an external meter. I would assume that this also means that the aperture ring must be left unlocked, and aperture adjusted at the lens, not in the camera, but the manual does not seem to address this, or if it does, I have not found it.

 

If you're keeping the lens, try it with the aperture ring locked, and see if the camera changes aperture (exposure comp button plus rear wheel when in manual mode). I doubt it will, and if it does not then unlock the ring and adjust aperture at the lens.

As I suspected, the D3400 no longer meters with any lens that has an aperture ring.

 

Wow. I guess in retrospect one could have guessed that was true if one remembered that the camera doesn't have an AI follower (or whatever you call that ring on the mount that mates with the AI ridge on a lens). Apparently, pre-G lenses do not communicate the set aperture to the camera through the electrical contacts—this is surprising! Or perhaps they do, and the low-end cameras just ignore that info.

 

Nikon should really make it clearer to potential buyers that the D3x00 and D5x00 do not meter with pre-G lenses. Losing AF is one thing, but losing metering? I guess the "G" for "gelded" really applies as much to the cameras as the lenses.

Wow. I guess in retrospect one could have guessed that was true if one remembered that the camera doesn't have an AI follower (or whatever you call that ring on the mount that mates with the AI ridge on a lens). Apparently, pre-G lenses do not communicate the set aperture to the camera through the electrical contacts—this is surprising! Or perhaps they do, and the low-end cameras just ignore that info.

 

Nikon should really make it clearer to potential buyers that the D3x00 and D5x00 do not meter with pre-G lenses. Losing AF is one thing, but losing metering? I guess the "G" for "gelded" really applies as much to the cameras as the lenses.

 

I think that this is a recent change on the D3xxx series cameras.

 

Nikon has been leaving off aperture follower tabs since the late 1980s(N4004). In those days, though, all lenses had aperture rings. They would meter with any lens with a CPU(not just AF lenses but also AI-P) and would operate fine provided that the lens was set to the minimum aperture. The full AI specs have a secondary tab called the "servo EE tab"-its original purpose was to allow for shutter priority with the correct attachment on an F2, but later was pressed into service to communicate that the lens was set to the minimum aperture via a switch located at about 8:00 on the lens mount(as illustrated above). Note that(to my knowledge) all AF lenses with aperture rings have a minimum aperture lock-this is designed for such bodies as well as newer high end "two dial" cameras that do have an AI tab(although on most of my newer bodies with an AI tab, including my F5, F100, and D800, it's possible to use a custom function to allow the aperture to be set by the ring in A and M modes).

 

In any case, the "full function when set to minimum aperture" feature was carried over to digitals without aperture follower tabs. The original D100(which is an N80 in disguise) works that way, as did quite a few subsequent bodies. Somewhere around the D40, they started dropping in-body AF motors on low end bodies, but the ability to meter with those lenses remained. In fact, to someone unfamiliar with Nikons, or someone like me who generally keeps their rings unlocked, it can be a bit frustrating when you see "FEE" flash on the LCD/in the viewfinder and realize that you aren't at minimum aperture. FWIW, I think all "screwdriver" lenses have aperture rings, although there are a handful of AF-S and AF-I lenses with aperture rings.

 

Removing the Servo EE switch from the body is just another step toward crippling legacy compatibility. I have said before-and will stand by it-that I think we are a few years away from low end bodies losing the last connection to the past that remains from the original Nikon F-the mechanical aperture stop-down lever. The last several new lenses Nikon has released have been "E" aperture lenses, and I think that kit lenses have gone that way. If/when that happens, lenses with an aperture ring SHOULD still function(albeit fully manually) but "G" lenses that are non "E" will be stuck at minimum aperture.

Nikon has been leaving off aperture follower tabs since the late 1980s(N4004). In those days, though, all lenses had aperture rings. They would meter with any lens with a CPU(not just AF lenses but also AI-P) and would operate fine provided that the lens was set to the minimum aperture.

 

That implies that CPU lenses (even pre-G ones) do communicate aperture info to the camera through the electrical contacts. In that case, the D3400's inability to meter with pre-G lenses is purely a software choice to artificially limit the camera's capabilities. Sad!

 

I think you're right that the low-end cameras will soon lose the mechanical aperture control unit, too. At least that would result in an actual cost savings, unlike the loss of metering support for pre-G lenses.

It's page 80 of the PDF manual.

 

As I suspected, the D3400 no longer meters with any lens that has an aperture ring. The lens in question will still operate, but will need to be treated as a fully manual lens, and metered either by guesswork and chimping the histogram after a shot, or by an external meter. I would assume that this also means that the aperture ring must be left unlocked, and aperture adjusted at the lens, not in the camera, but the manual does not seem to address this, or if it does, I have not found it.

 

If you're keeping the lens, try it with the aperture ring locked, and see if the camera changes aperture (exposure comp button plus rear wheel when in manual mode). I doubt it will, and if it does not then unlock the ring and adjust aperture at the lens.

An AF-D lens should meter with the D3300 although won't AF.

An AF-D lens should meter with the D3300 although won't AF.

 

A bit of a non-sequitur, that.

Just to hammer the nails down flush, so to speak: the earlier D3x00 models do meter with any chipped lens including the original AF, AFD, and AIP, which have aperture rings. But they only register and set aperture electronically, requiring that the minimum aperture switch be activated. If the camera detects a chip and that switch is up, the lens will not work at all in any mode. So the change is at least a little bit one of hardware, though I doubt the switch cost much to put in, and I wonder if there is really any software change. Essentially, when an AF or AFD lens is locked, it acts like a G lens anyway, so I don't see the point.

In that case, I would surmise that these lenses (those equipped with both CPUs and aperture rings) do not in fact tell the camera what aperture their rings are set at, but only what their maximum aperture (lowest f-number) is. Thus, if a camera, such as the D3400, is not equipped with the minimum-aperture-set detector you speak of (and also has no AI feeler), it has no way of knowing that the lens's aperture ring is set to the smallest aperture.

 

Thus, in order to avoid the possibility of the lens's being unable to stop down to the aperture specified by the camera due to the aperture ring not being set to the smallest aperture, Nikon simply disables metering entirely on such a camera, thus avoiding making a "promise" that the camera cannot keep.

 

Well, it makes sense in terms of logic, although it doesn't make sense from the viewpoint of customer satsifaction.

Well, it makes sense in terms of logic, although it doesn't make sense from the viewpoint of customer satsifaction.

 

I'm guessing that Nikon probably weighed the target customer of a D3x00 cameras and what their expectations would likely be. I think of folks like my sister, who wanted a "good camera" to take pictures of the kids, but initially she was happy with the kit lens. She now has the decent 55-300 and the excellent 35mm 1.8, but they were later additions and of course are fully compatible with her camera(although I think hers is a 3100).

 

There's also the fact that MOST lenses with aperture rings are screwdriver lenses, and there again the target buyer isn't likely to want to put up with manual focus. The in-lens-motor lenses(AF-S and AF-I) with aperture rings are few and far between, and most are fairly high end lenses. Offhand, the only one I know of in the current line-up is the 17-35 2.8(a $2K retail lens, and while I could see myself using this lens there are LOTS of better lenses in that range for DX cameras). There were a few others-the one that comes immediately to mind is the last generation 80-200 2.8. All of the AF-I lenses were super-teles, and still run 4 figures on the used market.

 

I would suppose that if I were Nikon, I'd look at this as motivation to move someone who wants to use aperture ring lenses up to a D5x00 body for ~$250 more. Truthfully, though, someone with a lot of aperture ring lenses would be better served by moving up even more to a D7x00 body since that will give autofocus-and before the D7500 would meter with AI lenses.

In that case, I would surmise that these lenses (those equipped with both CPUs and aperture rings) do not in fact tell the camera what aperture their rings are set at, but only what their maximum aperture (lowest f-number) is. Thus, if a camera, such as the D3400, is not equipped with the minimum-aperture-set detector you speak of (and also has no AI feeler), it has no way of knowing that the lens's aperture ring is set to the smallest aperture.

 

Thus, in order to avoid the possibility of the lens's being unable to stop down to the aperture specified by the camera due to the aperture ring not being set to the smallest aperture, Nikon simply disables metering entirely on such a camera, thus avoiding making a "promise" that the camera cannot keep.

 

Well, it makes sense in terms of logic, although it doesn't make sense from the viewpoint of customer satsifaction.

I actually don't have any problem with the meter not working on older lenses.

Offhand, the only one I know of in the current line-up is the 17-35 2.8 ... the one that comes immediately to mind is the last generation 80-200 2.8

There's also the 28-70/2.8 and the 300/4. And there are at least two versions each of the 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4, and 600/4. Do agree though that one probably wouldn't go for any of the ones mentioned for use on a D3400.

I'd think Chulkim is right, except for the anomaly of the AFD preset lens. I have the 85/2.8 PCD, and on a D3200 as with a D7100, although there is no mechanical linkage at all, the camera reads the setting of the aperture ring, and meters for it even when the preset button is holding the aperture open. If you forget to push the button, the lens will shoot at the set aperture even though it's actually wide open, just as if an auto aperture tab failed to close down. Thus it's clear that the camera can read aperture electronically off the aperture ring, even if that's the only lens in which it's done.

 

And in earlier versions of the 3x00 series, there are never unfulfilled promises, because an AF or AFD lens can't function unless the ring is in its minimum position. If the switch is not actuated, the camera stops with an error message. The only way to make a chipped lens work without setting it to minimum would be either to glue the switch or remove the contacts.

 

So one must conclude that the saving, such as it is, consists pretty much entirely in the hardware of that switch, except for the bit of software that raises the error message.

It's fascinating to speculate about the many decisions Nikon engineers must have made over decades regarding the F mount, each one made in order to add some new feature that had not been dreamed of, or to correct a deficiency that had not been perceived, at the mount's inception. In an uncharitable mood (or if one is a Sony fanboy) one could call the F mount a pile of kludges on top of kludges...but you have to admire the tenacity and ingenuity of those mostly-nameless engineers.

I'm reminded here of a review I read long long ago about the then venerable (and now more so) BMW opposed twin motorcycle, in which it was hailed as "the triumph of development over design."

 

Though I suspect the engineers of cutting cost a bit too aggressively, I also have to give them credit for the degree of compatibility they've managed to preserve at least somewhat. After all, despite the lack of metering, you can still put a 1960 vintage F lens on a brand new D3400, and make a picture.

"That implies that CPU lenses (even pre-G ones) do communicate aperture info to the camera through the electrical contacts."

 

- No. Definitely not.

If you look and compare, there are less contact pins on pre-G lenses (plain AF and AF-D). All aperture information on those lenses is communicated mechanically through the AI 'ledge' or minimum aperture post.

 

Even the FEE error is signalled purely by the position of the camera AI follower, or by activation of the minimum aperture switch.

 

As further proof: Fitting a 'Dandelion' CPU chip to AI/AI-s manual-focus lenses makes them look to the camera exactly like an AF lens (in MF mode). There is obviously no way that a glued-on Dandelion module can tell what aperture has been chosen on the lens.

Chiming in belatedly, in case this adds anything...

• The lens electronics only tell the camera the maximum aperture of the lens, not the current aperture. There's no electronic feeler on the aperture ring on the lens that communicates its setting electronically.
  
• On AI-S lenses and later (but practically, electronic lenses, before E-aperture) the aperture lever moves a fixed amount to stop the lens down by a fixed number of stops from wide-open. Since this gives you the difference between the metered (wide open) aperture and the final exposure aperture, this is all you need for basic metering.
  
• Matrix metering also needs to know what the maximum aperture and focal length are, which are also provided electronically on electronic lenses.
  
• On pre-AI-S lenses (and effectively for pre-electronic lenses on DSLRs) the aperture ring stops the movement of the aperture - the aperture lever on the camera just moves through its full range, but the aperture only opens as far as set by the aperture ring.
  

• Cameras with an aperture following ring can tell the aperture setting on a non-electronic lens, and let you set the aperture through the lens (only).

• Without an aperture following ring, the only way a DSLR can control the exposure is to know electronically how far it's moving the aperture lever, and know the lens will move to the aperture its requesting.

• To control the aperture from the camera, you need to have the aperture ring on the lens set to the minimum value, since otherwise it would block the movement of the aperture part way when the camera tries to set the aperture with the lever. (Technically not quite true, but it's how Nikons work, and no Nikon body takes advantage of doing otherwise.)

• A body with an aperture following ring will only let you set the aperture from the body if the aperture following ring tells it that you've set the lens to its minimum aperture, so that it knows the aperture lever movement is the only thing affecting exposure.

• A body without an aperture following ring will only let you control the aperture from the body if the EE detection switch tells it that you've set the lens to its minimum aperture, so that it knows the aperture lever movement is the only thing affecting exposure.

• G lenses don't engage the EE detection switch or move the aperture following ring, and communicate that they're "G" electronically; you can only set the aperture electronically with a G lens.

• E-aperture lenses don't engage with the aperture lever, so all this is irrelevant so long as your body knows about them.

• The older PC-E lenses (and some third-party lenses) don't have an aperture lever controlling the aperture at all - they just move the aperture when you turn the ring. This means the view through the finder isn't "wide open" for accurate focus, as with most lenses - you have to stop the lens down manually when you're ready to shoot. Because the metering happens when the lens is stopped down, these lenses should meter fine if the body is compatible at all; on a body with an aperture following ring, these won't move the ring, so the body thinks the lens is wide open (already at the shooting aperture) for the purposes of metering. The problem Nikon bodies have is that they're expecting to move an aperture lever and for this to affect exposure, and on DSLRs the meter isn't designed for last-second stop-down metering after the aperture lever has moved (possibly because this would require the mirror to stay down until the lens aperture has moved, which would delay the exposure).

• The Df is odd, and has a way of telling the camera what aperture you've set the lens to without the aperture following ring needing to know about it.

• The D3400 is the only Nikon DSLR I'm aware of without either an aperture following ring or an EE detection switch. Therefore it can't tell what aperture you've set the lens to and whether the movement it's trying to put into the aperture lever works, even for an electronic lens (such as the recent non-G 300mm f/4 AF-S). It only meters for G and E-aperture lenses.

• Some versions of the Tamron 90mm (since 2008) have a built-in motor (I don't believe it's their USD "ultrasonic drive", so the Nikon equivalent would be "AF-I") - so they will focus on bodies without an AF motor (such as the D3x00 and D5x00 range). There are older versions ("272EN") of the same lens that rely on screwdriver focus (AF-D in Nikon terminology). The presence of the AF motor is one reason to pick this lens over, say, the 100mm Tokina.

• I believe all (vaguely recent) versions of the AF Tamron 90mm are effectively "G" lenses - they have no aperture ring. Unfortunately, this means that if the camera is refusing to set the aperture from the body, there's no way to control the aperture at all - but Tamron think they're compatible with the D3400, which a "G" lens should be. That said, I'm confused how Bryan has set the lens to its minimum aperture if this is the lens we're talking about. Bryan, did you set the aperture on the body to minimum aperture? That's not necessary - it's only necessary to set the aperture on non-G lenses to the minimum as a hack so that the camera has full control over the aperture range.

TL;DR: The Tamron 90mm Di SP AF should work fine (both for autofocus and metering) on the D3400, because it's effectively an AF-I G lens. But Bryan's report of "setting the aperture dial to its smallest setting" suggests a bit of confusion.

 

I hope it's just a case of cleaning the contacts. If that doesn't work, I'd get the lens replaced. I had an 85mm Samyang turn up with non-functional electronics at one point; I assume it was just a dodgy connection in the manufacture. The Tamron 90mm Di SP AF has been around for a while - it's possible that something corroded while sitting on a shelf. If cleaning the contacts don't work, a reputable dealer should send you a replacement.

Since that last post was an essay, just to be clear about the post-2008 version of the Tamron 90mm Di SP AF that this thread is about:

 

It's an AF-I equivalent G lens. It has an internal motor, it doesn't have an aperture ring. It should work just fine on a D3400.

 

But yes, Nikon should have honking great warnings about that camera. I keep forgetting that they've removed the EE switch. (It's in an awkward place for trying to miniaturise the camera, cut costs, and keep the thing protected from moisture and dust, and most lenses have been G for quite a long time now, but it's still annoying.)

 

The countdown has begun for the first DSLR without an aperture lever, now that E lenses are rolling out. Fortunately I don't think AF-P actually gives a reason to take anything off the body, so I doubt we'll lose the ability to use an E-aperture AF-S lens on a DSLR any time soon. Unless the allegedly forthcoming mirrorless bodies only work with AF-P, of course.

The countdown has begun for the first DSLR without an aperture lever, now that E lenses are rolling out. Fortunately I don't think AF-P actually gives a reason to take anything off the body, so I doubt we'll lose the ability to use an E-aperture AF-S lens on a DSLR any time soon. Unless the allegedly forthcoming mirrorless bodies only work with AF-P, of course.

 

From what I've seen, AF-P is still mostly limited to smaller DX format lenses, and Nikon is still introducing AF-S designs. Witness the super-tele zoom with the integral TC that announced a month or so back-it's E and AF-S. I think there are a few FX AF-P lenses, but by and large most of them are DX zooms.

 

I don't own an AF-P lens, but I've played with a few in the store. My observation of them is that they are very precise and dead silent. I was playing with an 18-55 at the local camera store a few months back that the guy behind the counter thought was broken because he couldn't hear it focusing. The lens was perfectly fine-it was just that when you hit the shutter button the lens would silently "snap" into focus-I'd put the noise from focusing on par with the noise VR makes. That's in contrast to even the better AF-S lenses, where there's usually a pronounced whir, a quick rack of the focus, and then a bit of hunting to fine tune it. Of course, when you put a good lens and good body together, the hunting is virtually imperceptible, but my impression is that AF-S prioritizes speed and goes as quickly as it can to get the lens "close" before really nailing the focus. Of course, that's ignoring the older AF-S kit lenses, which give me the impression of basically being a screwdriver lens with focus motor shifted into the lens mount(as evidenced by the fact that the front element spins and the lens MUST be in MF mode to MF without damaging it)-those are fairly noisy.

 

For the still photographer, AF-S is still great because even with big lenses the ring motor focuses fast. It's just(relatively) loud and somewhat "jerky". I don't see it going away.

 

My impression is that AF-P is targeted mostly at video use, where the silent and smooth focusing of AF-P is well suited. I don't think it's any secret that Nikon has lagged in the video market(where Canon has had a lot of success). That's not a big deal to me-I think I've taken one video on my D800 and that was just to play with the feature. Most of the time when I take videos, it's more documentary in nature(i.e. I film myself taking something apart for my own reference, or do a quick video to demonstrate something to a friend). For that, my iPhone is perfectly fine, and if I wanted to get a bit more serious(i.e. doing Youtube videos of some of that kind of stuff-I've talked about doing them for work) something like a Go Pro would probably suit me just as well. If I WERE serious about it, though, Canon and Sony would be good starting points.

 

As for the Tamron lens in question-we know that 3rd party lenses are reverse engineered rather than using official Nikon specs. I wonder if this "G" lens from Tamron uses some tricks that make it look to the camera like a lens with an aperture ring. Of course, I'm talking out my rear-I did look closely at the photos I could find of the mount and there doesn't appear to be a "step" or anything of the sort that would activate the Servo EE switch. Still, I do notice that it retains the AI-s notch-a legacy feature not present on any of my G lenses.

I think there are a few FX AF-P lenses

One actually: FX 70-300.

As for the Tamron lens in question-we know that 3rd party lenses are reverse engineered rather than using official Nikon specs.

Certainly true for Sigma and possibly Tokina, but I would not be so certain about Tamron.

I have this Tamron, and (while it's not in front of me) I don't remember the back having a "step" of any kind - I think it's as "G" as my 14-24 is. But I might be mis-remembering. I'll have to check my other lenses for the AI-S notch, although now I think about it I don't think I remember any mechanical bits sticking out of the back of the 14-24. Sigma and Tamron both seem better at keeping their lenses fully compatible.

 

I believe the theory is that, apart from quietness, the AF-P lenses behave better for contrast-detect autofocus (for video). Whether that's due to a fixed step size or something else, I couldn't say. Still, it would make sense in combination with a mirrorless system. I guess we'll find out.

I know that this has been hashed out, but I was in the local camera store yesterday and we talked about lens compatibility.

 

I commented on the fact that the D3400 doesn't meter with any lens that has an aperture ring, and just to test it out they handed me one off the shelf along with a 14mm 2.8(the only lens with an aperture ring on their rental shelf). Sure enough, it works fine as long as the camera is set to M, but of course with no metering. It throws an error if set to anything else.

 

As a side note, their rental D850 was finally in, and I got a chance to play with it. I didn't do a whole lot, but the grip depth vs. my D800 surprised me and I was blown away by the focus speed. The only thing that would take a bit of a learning curve for me is that the mode and ISO buttons have more or less switched places, although admittedly I change the ISO a lot more often than the mode so it makes sense.