G lenses on D300

From research I see that I can use G Nikkors on a D300 with full AF function ever though there is no provision for screw drive on the G's. How is the AF performance? Fast?

The G designation on Nikon lenses merely means there is no aperture ring. It has nothing to do with whether the lens has a built-in AF motor or not. I have G lenses with and without an AF-S motor on the lens, and I also have AF-S lenses that are not G as well as G.

 

For example, all early AF-S lenses up to around 2002 or so have an aperture ring, hence they are not G lenses. E.g. the early 300mm/f4 AF-S lens, before the current PF model with VR. My DX 10.5mm/f2.8 fisheye is a G lens, but it also has no AF motor inside and depends on screwdriver AF.

 

When the D300 was introduced in August 2008, along with the D3, they had the then state-of-the-art Multi-CAM 3500 AF module with 51 AF points, with the center 3 columns of 5 AF points each: 3x5 = total 15 cross-type AF points. An improved version of that AF module is still used on the latest D780, but it has been superseded by the Multi-CAM 20000 (D5, D500, D850) and Multi-CAM 37000 on the D6.

What Shun said, but just to add that the same applies to third party lenses. For example, I have a Sigma 8mm fish eye that's screwdriver focus but has no aperture ring (effectively G AF-D). There aren't many Nikon examples - AF-S was a thing before G, and Nikon realised (as Canon had) that building bodies cheaper without a motor and then charging more for the lenses was a better model (plus AF-S usually makes for better performance). Knowing that the attachment rate for bodies with a motor is higher, third parties were probably keener to cheap out - especially since it avoided needing to get the lens focus protocol right.

 

I had a D700, which is probably comparable to the D300 for autofocus. The motor wasn't as aggressive as my F5, but I'm not sure how the D3/4/5 compare. I believe the grip offered higher voltage to the lens, so you might get better autofocus from some AF-S lenses with a grip on a D700 compared with the internal battery; a nagging memory makes me think this might not be true of the D300, but it might be worth checking.

 

Otherwise, the D300 should be compatible with anything AI or later except AF-P (notably the latest 70-300s). You're good with E aperture like the 200-500, for example.

The TLDR is, all the Nikon DSLRs and the film SLRs that are not older than an F5 are fully G compatible.

The TLDR is, all the Nikon DSLRs and the film SLRs that are not older than an F5 are fully G compatible.

What is a TLDR? Too long, don’t read? :cool:

 

Twin Lens, Dynamic Range

What is a TLDR? Too long, don’t read? :cool:

 

Twin Lens, Dynamic Range

“Too long, didn’t read” - shorthand for “now here’s the quick version”

Just to be pedantic, the FM3a can't do anything useful with a G lens. And you can get away with G on older cameras like the F4 if you don't mind shooting in S or P mode. But yes, for all the grumbling about it being an anti-feature, G works on anything remotely recent and electronic. (How accurate the aperture lever is if you're doing time lapses may be another matter.)

For more completeness, since this thread asked about autofocus, that has been more of a mess. After the F3AF non-start, Nikon managed to make some bodies which will autofocus with screwdriver lenses but not AF-S (F801/F601/F501/F401/F55/F60) and the dSLRs that'll autofocus with AF-S but not screwdriver (most low end). Way to commit to technology choices...

 

Fortunately, usually paying enough has got you near maximum compatibility, so the D300 didn't have a problem until AF-P was introduced.

So, if for some reason I decided to purchase a Nikon D3500 with a kit zoom, the lens would function perfectly on my D300 with fast AF.

So, if for some reason I decided to purchase a Nikon D3500 with a kit zoom, the lens would function perfectly on my D300 with fast AF.

Yes. (Though the AF speed would also depend on the motor in the lens - don’t expect the kit lens to be a speed demon.)

NO. The kit options I can see for the D3500 are the AF-P DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR and optionally the AF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G. the "G" aspect is fine, but both these lenses are AF-P, for which Nikon didn't add support until after the D300. (Also you might not want that version of the 70-300 anyway - paying the extra for the VR one is probably worthwhile. Optically it's supposed to be ok, though.)

 

If instead you went for a kit with the AF-S DX 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G, that lens will work fine on the D300, and it's well regarded - but I'm not sure that's an official Nikon kit combination.

 

Also, worth remembering that the D300's version of the MultiCAM 3500 isn't as good below f/5.6 as some more modern bodies, so a third-party f/6.3 lens might be inconsistent even if the autofocus works (although I had one on my D700 and it wasn't too bad).

NO. The kit options I can see for the D3500 are the AF-P DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR and optionally the AF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G. the "G" aspect is fine, but both these lenses are AF-P, for which Nikon didn't add support until after the D300. (Also you might not want that version of the 70-300 anyway - paying the extra for the VR one is probably worthwhile. Optically it's supposed to be ok, though.)

 

If instead you went for a kit with the AF-S DX 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G, that lens will work fine on the D300, and it's well regarded - but I'm not sure that's an official Nikon kit combination.

 

Also, worth remembering that the D300's version of the MultiCAM 3500 isn't as good below f/5.6 as some more modern bodies, so a third-party f/6.3 lens might be inconsistent even if the autofocus works (although I had one on my D700 and it wasn't too bad).

You’re right. Did not realize they’d changed the kit lens to P. My bad.

 

But with DSLR stuff being cheap now, can’t you skip over kit zooms and get some better lens used for not much money? Maybe that Tokina 16-50/2.8 that everybody used to be impressed with?

Actually, although I approve in principle, I'm not sure it's actually possible to buy a D3500 without at least an 18-55 bundled with it. Not that there's any harm in having it as a spare, and at least traditionally the kit zooms have punched way above their weight (because the camera makers know non-specialist reviewers won't bother to put a better lens on when reviewing the body, so it's disproportionately bad to have an iffy one).

 

The Tokina 16-50 seems to cost about as much as the D3500+kit (checking B&H). Also unless I'm confused it has screwdriver focus, so although it'll autofocus on the D300, it won't autofocus on the D3500, which doesn't have an internal motor.

Quick follow up: Sanford, are you thinking of a D3500 as a backup (it is tiny) or for a second shooter in the family or similar? I mention it just because the handling is very different. My limited experience of a D7x00 body is that they're still very size-reduced compared with the D300/D700/D8x0 bodies; you might be able to find a used D7100 in the same price ball park as a new D3500 kit, while still having two dials, a MultiCAM 3500, a pentaprism, compatibility with everything, 14-bit raw, etc. That said, KEH are currently out, so I might be wrong about price - the D7200 is definitely more.

 

Just a thought.

I don't think they sell the D3500 body only. I wonder how much they would want for it if they do. Perhaps $300?

Actually, although I approve in principle, I'm not sure it's actually possible to buy a D3500 without at least an 18-55 bundled with it. Not that there's any harm in having it as a spare, and at least traditionally the kit zooms have punched way above their weight (because the camera makers know non-specialist reviewers won't bother to put a better lens on when reviewing the body, so it's disproportionately bad to have an iffy one).

 

The Tokina 16-50 seems to cost about as much as the D3500+kit (checking B&H). Also unless I'm confused it has screwdriver focus, so although it'll autofocus on the D300, it won't autofocus on the D3500, which doesn't have an internal motor.

I was thinking of the Tokina as a lens for the D300. It actually came up in a Keh.com coupon email just now (LENS3E 15% off so about $260).

 

Of course, if Sanford really wants a D300+D3500 kit and you can’t buy the D3500 without the lens that doesn’t work on the D300, that does make things more difficult.

I've been using my old D300 with a 50mm after the 18-200mm zoom got too heavy. Just thought about adding a cheap, lightweight zoom and the Nikon kit lens comes with a virtually free camera included (or the other way around). Adding a pricier zoom gets me back to the weight issue.

I've been using my old D300 with a 50mm after the 18-200mm zoom got too heavy. Just thought about adding a cheap, lightweight zoom and the Nikon kit lens comes with a virtually free camera included (or the other way around). Adding a pricier zoom gets me back to the weight issue.

Oh ok, then you could look for an older camera kit with the older lens or just find a reputable source for the older lens. E.g. Nikon Nikkor 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 G Aspherical AF-S DX VR Black Autofocus Lens For APS-C Sensor DSLRS {52} at KEH Camera

Yup - the 18-55 AF-S saves 13oz over the 18-200, and it's actually slightly lighter than the AF-P version. I tend to forget how heavy the 18-200 is (I've only handled one briefly) - the 28-200 I used to use is quite a bit lighter. For what it's worth, going from the D300 to the D7100 saves over 5oz - probably more since the battery and cards are smaller.

Looks like Nikon made four versions of the AF-S 18-55, and somehow the VR II manages to be the lightest of all:

 

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G - Wikipedia

 

I suppose the 35mm DX prime would be another lightweight option, more versatile than a 50mm on the D300. But the D300 itself, of course, is still more than double the weight of a D3500.

Nikon made four versions of the AF-S 18-55

Yup, the VR (MK I) was a real porker, but it sure went on a diet!

 

I suppose the 35mm DX prime would be another lightweight option, more versatile than a 50mm on the D300

 

Cropping the 35mm to a FOV of a 50mm..... Humm..

 

OK, 35mm v 50mm lenses. The 35mm covers almost exactly 2x the area.

 

The 35mm pic shot on a D3500 is 24 Mpix

The 50mm pic shot on a D300 is12.3 MPix

 

Interesting!

I've always thought of the 50mm on a D300 (already a 75mm equiv.) as being easily cropped to a 105mm equiv. We all loved our 105mm Nikkors way back when.

I used a 50mm from time to time on a D300, but found it too long for general use (I wouldn't want a 75mm on full frame as a standard lens either). The 28mm f/1.8 FX would be an interesting choice on a DX camera, but it's relatively large for a wideangle prime and, while not a heavyweight lens, is still significantly heavier than the 18-55 zooms or the 35mm DX. At the longer end, a 105mm is for me a useful focal length on both formats - I have the DC, which is a really nice portrait lens, but has screwdriver AF and is built like a tank, so no lightweight. The old 18-70 is another nice standard zoom on DX and it's nice to have a bit more range at the long end, but its robust build quality makes it heavier than the 18-55 lenses.