nikon lenses

[zanemullin]

I have a few nikon lenses with my film camera and i am thinking of buying a

digital camera. I was wondering what the advantages of using a DX lens versus a

regular lens.

[johnw63]

DX lenses are specifically designed for the Nikon digital SLRs , with Nikon's smaller sensor. Some film lenses work very well with the Digital SLRs , but some do not. They can get more chromatic aberrations and the like. It's a bit hit and miss.

[frank_skomial]

I guess there are more disadvantages than advantages.

 

Since you asked about advantages, some of them are:

cheaper lens since less glass needed - but Nikon may not necessarily think this way,

lighter, smaller,

back end internal element has better coating reducing perhaps better reflections from the shiny digital sensor filter,

 

Disadvantages: - too long to list and you did not ask for them, just be happy with the lenses.

[arthuryeo]

<i>[DX lenses are specifically designed for the Nikon digital SLRs , with Nikon's smaller sensor. Some film lenses work very well with the Digital SLRs , but some do not. They can get more chromatic aberrations and the like.]</i>

<p><p>

Based on my experiences with my old D100, D2H and the current D2X, all the chromatic aberrations (CA) I saw were with older lenses that were designed before the era of the DX lenses appearance.

<p><p>

In general, you should get less CA with the newer lenses because Nikon has found ways to cut down on the cost of making ED elements and this technology is now used quite extensively, even among the consumer lenses.

[zanemullin]

Thank you. In general how new should the lenses be to work well with digital bodies?

[frank_skomial]

One criteria for "how new" could be if the lens is listed in the nikonusa.com, but that would be very limitted, since tons of older lenses work wonders on DSLR.

[johnw63]

Yep. Some older AI and AIS lenses seem to work great. The 50-135mm seems to be one.

[hash]

Actually if you already have full frame 35mm lenses there is no advantage in changing them for DX.

[studor13]

Frank, you are one of the few that I believe who actually know what they are talking about, so please, could you give some more thoughts on using non DX lenses on digital bodies.

 

For example, at what focal length does the problem of CA reduce to a bare minimum, and also you mentioned that there are many other disadvantages in using the old lenses.

[hh253]

I have the same problem adding to film the D200 in order to use the old AI lenses.

Somebody knows, if there is a list of lenses, which will work.

For example I have the 24, 35/2, 105/2,5 macro 55/3,5 and the zoom 70 - 200

On top of this I will buy the 18 - 70 AF for digital.

What are your suggestions? tanks.

 

Heinz

[arthuryeo]

>One criteria for "how new" could be if the lens is listed in the nikonusa.com, but that would be very limitted, since tons of older lenses work wonders on DSLR.

<p><p>

Yes, I agree that some of the older lenses may have exceptional resolution but I really doubt they can match the newer ones in terms of CA reduction in very challenging situations.

<p><p>

From my experiences, even the the venerable 85mm/1.4 AFD Nikkor showed problems with CA in very challenging lighting conditions, let alone the much older AI lenses without any ED elements.

<p><p>

Zane,

<p>

If you go to the <a href="http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/index.htm">Japanese Nikon website</a>, you will be able to see the release date of the lenses. I would think that those released in the last 5-7 years or so should be better equipped to deal with CA than the older lenses. If you are concerned with CA, look for the inclusion of ED elements, they will help.

[yeux tortu]

With D200 all AI and AIS lenses will work well. As far as CA. if you shoot twigs backlit against bright sky, and look at 100% crops on monitor, then you will be less happy with digital. Some lenses such as the 17-55 handle ca very well, but your longer non dx telephoto lenses are not as good. The 80-200 2.8 ED comes to mind.

[studor13]

What I don't get is that fact that no one seems to have CA problems with say the 50mm lenses. I don't have this lens, but as I understand it, it doesn't have ED.

 

I have only two primes - 35mm f2 AIS and the 200mm f4 AIS. I don't have a problem with the 200mm lens. I also don't have a problem with my 75-150mm Series E. (well, I do when shooting into the sun, but that's a different story probably)

 

I also believe that the shorter the focal length the more apparent CA becomes. As Ron mentioned, things like twigs are a disaster

with the 35mm f2.

 

So, is it that at the longer end, CA is more problematic in zooms without an ED element, or have I got things completely wrong?

[johndc]

It could be because the light out of the back of the retrofocal lens is less collimated than the light from a telephoto design. I'm just hypothesizing here.

[zanemullin]

Thanks for all the help everyone

 

I was also wondering if there are there any cheap wide angle lenses that work for both digital and film? im looking for minimum barrel distortion and i have been looking around everywhere and can't seem to find one

[zanemullin]

for reference i am planning to do a little architecture but mostly landscapes and seascapes. a small zoom would be best but if there is a fixed wide angle such as 18 digital or 28 film that would be great

thanks