My beef with the "g" mount

[scott_warn]

I am really upset about all of Nikons recent offerings only being

offered in the "g" mount. To the point, gasp, where I am starting to

consider switching to Canon. This has been a frequent topic and many

think that this issue has been beat to death. I could even concure.

The reason that I am posting is that, for those of us who wish Nikon

to retain the aperture ring on selected new offerings, the only way

to get Nikon to pay attention is to keep this issue right in front of

their noses. DO NOT GO MEEKLY INTO THE NIGHT!

 

Nikon is eliminating the aperture ring for one reason and one reason

only, COST SAVINGS. They save about 10 to 30 dollars on each lens

and they also save the cost of an aperture coupling mechanism on

bodies such as the N80, although the cost of adding the sub command

dial probably offsets the savings of not having the aperture coupling

mechanism. These cost savings make sense on a consumer grade 200 or

300 dollar lens and I will grant them those savings. These cheap

zooms do not have enough sharpness for me to consider. They also may

make sense in the consumer grade cameras (although if I were

designing these cameras I would have the sub command dial LEFT hand

accessible - under the mount or where the aperture ring is would be

ideal). You can always lock a "D" mount lens at the minimum for

these later bodies and they function perfectly. I understand that

Nikon is in a very competitive market and to survive they have to

reduce costs and sell inexpensive cameras. If I were running Nikon I

would be looking at some of these very same cost savings. What I

would NOT do is alienate my older users, especially the baby boom

generation who now have the capital to start purchasing items that

were once "dream items". Getting that last kid out of college is a

big boost to the bottom line. Another thing that I would do is to

reduce the number of models offered, both film and digital. Nikon

has to stop trying to fill every stinking market niche. This is a

waste of resources, instead of spending capital on innovation, Nikon

is spending all of their R & D on shined up "me too" models. In the

long run that will kill them, look at the market share GM has lost

trying to compete with everything from the original Beetle to

Mercedes. Anyone remember the Vega or the Cadillac diesels, what a

disaster!

 

I think that VR sounds very useful, I would love to have it. Lugging

around a 10 lbs. tripod is getting to be a pain. My problem is that

all of these lenses cost over 1000.00 US and at that price level I

think that Nikon should spend the extra 20 bucks for the aperture

ring. Yes, the 80-400 has the ring, the problem is that the reports

that I have seen on this lens indicate that it is a dog compared to

the 300 f4. At some point I am sure that Nikon will start to

introduce VR versions of some of the primes and I want them to

include the damn aperture ring! That way I could choose the F5 body

for when I need the VR, use it the way I prefer, and also have the

option of using the F2 for when I want to just slow down and really

study a subject.

 

My other problem with the lack of an aperture ring is in the way that

I am forced to use the F5. I tend to shoot in the A mode and use

that ring for, rapid, gross adjustments for depth of field/shutter

speed. One very quick turn can take me from max to min. Why don't I

use the sub command dial? Two reasons, the placement sucks (I have

to use my shutter finger for it) and have you ever tried to go from

f4 to f22 at 1/3 stop increments? It takes toooo damn

lllooooongggggggg!!! The one thing about the F5 that really bugs me

is that stupid 1/3 stop increment on both dials, I asked a Nikon rep

why they didn't offer a revision to the camera program to allow

setting the increment. Basically, his response was that Nikon is NOT

interested in hearing suggestions from the general public, a brutally

honest answer that speaks volumes about his frustration with Nikon,

guess they don't listen to their reps either. The F100 offers 1/3 or

1/2 stop choice, big deal, slow and slower. My N8008s has 1 stop

increments and it speeds the handling of the camera immensely, I can

actually use the camera in manual and quickly change my shutter speed

from 1/8 to 1/4000. I have a question for the A@#$ Retentive

engineer who chose the 1/3 stop increments, what is the point of

having the fastest AF in the world if you are twiddling dials while

your shot gets away? For crying out loud, the shutter speed is

infinately variable in program or aperture preferred mode, the

aperture is infinately variable in shutter preferred mode. That

leaves Manual mode, do we really need to be able to select both

aperture AND shutter speed in manual at 1/3 stop increments? Let me

decide, my choice would be 1 stop increments on the main command dial

and 1/3 stop on the sub command dial. That way I could shoot the

same way I use my N8008s, in Program and use Program shift to get the

effect I desire. With my N8008s it is quite easy to put the camera

to eye, look at what Program has chosen, and with one quick sweep of

the thumb shift the program to what I want. Not so with the F5, it

takes 3 TIMES as much sweeping to acomplish the same change, this

leads to missed shots and much frustration. My accomidation to the

1/3 stop increments on the F5 was to use the aperture ring to allow

rapid changes in depth/shutter effects. Now Nikon wants to take that

away from me.

 

I have been shooting with Nikon equipment for over 30 years and have

the experience and income so that what interests me is the semi

premium lenses, a 300 f4 VR and a 500 f8 VR would really tempt me,

but not if they lack that aperture ring. I would buy the 70-200 f2.8

right now if it were offered in a "D" mount. That 70-200 is one big

reason why I am SOOOO PEEVED! When I got my 180 f2.8 the 80-200 f2.8

was about the same price, I chose the 180 and have always wondered

about that decision. Now, I have the money saved, Nikon anounces the

70-200 VR, I wait, and it is that damn "g" mount! Come on Nikon,

bring out a "D" version of that lens, I will even pay an extra 100

dollars for it, that gives you an additional 80 dollars profit.

[fishbulb]

I agree 100%. I shoot mostly on aperture priority and I ONLY use the aperture ring on the lens. I'm much quicker with that ring than with a thumb dial.

[pete_su]

I've never understood this mentality. It's not like ANY of the EOS lenses have aperture

rings. What is the rationale to switch all your equipment over to buy electronic lenses

that you claim not to like? It's not like there is a shortage of Nikon lenses available

with aperture rings.

[scott_warn]

I want the 70-200 f2.8 VR with an aperture ring. The reason is the lousy placement of the sub command dial, the 1/3 stop increment, and the desire for occasional use on my older gear. It is not too much to ask for, and as I stated, I am willing to pay an additional sum for it.

 

As for the Canon issue, I suspect that Canon has not saddled their cameras with controls so finicky that the controls slow you down. I have even heard that the user can select the command increments on their cameras. Some day I may actually take the step of trying one out for myself instead of relying on heresay.

[genec]

There are two criticisms that I have most frequently heard about Canon cameras - that the controls require at least three hands and that new lenses are not backward compatible with older bodies.

 

I like the G lens. I have never used the aperture ring on nay of my lense since I got the first body (F100) that used the control ring. I find it far more convenient and thus faster. All this proves is different strokes for different folks.

[Carl Stone]

"I want the 70-200 f2.8 VR with an aperture ring."

 

Well you'll just have to, get over it, won't you? Is it considered

cool to ask for something that you have no chance of getting, and then bitch about it

when it doesn't arrive?

You can use the lens on a more modern camera, and if 1/3 stops give you agita,

switch to Canon, that'll teach Nikon not to ignore you. ROFLMAO

[tcb.photo]

Hey Scott

 

Listen there are a lot of people who wish the "G" mount didn't exist. But it does. I don't like it because eventually I'll have to duplicate certain focal lengths, or not be able to use a lens on my manual body. I have a F3 and F100, I want to be able to use the same lens on both bodies, and with the "G" mount you can't. Well you can, it's just that the "G" lens will be perminately on F22.

 

So, I understand the rage. That being said, you have to understand it's a done deal. I wrote Nikon and told them my feelings and a lot of others did also. But they've put way too much into R&D in the "G" mount to turn back now. They are focusing on new lens and digital bodies to remain competative. So I got over it. You can shake you fist at the storm, but the storm still comes

 

You have to understand, I think Nikon feels they continued to make and fully support Manual cameras too long. The problem doesn't exist with Canon, because the EOS line is all AF. If you have a old Canon Manual body you never could use the EOS mount. Nikon spoiled us, by continuing to make the AF and manual mounts interchangeable long after the major compition did away with it. I feel bad for the people with the F4 and N90s, because they won't work on their bodies either.

 

Like I said I agree with you, it seems dumb to me to make lens that won't work on two of their current line bodies. Yes the F3 is still listed on the web site as a current body. But, it' a decision they made and they can't now go back. I'm sorry to say this, but all you can do is send them a letter to vent your anger, move on and live with it, or upgrade to a new body.

 

I feel your anger

 

Rob

[josh a.]

Scott,

 

You are so right. What will most of the people on this forum say if they do it again, but now the F100 and F5 won't accept a new mount? It looks to me, and a lot of others, like all Nikon is doing is forcing functional obsolesce. I'm sorry, but to me it's a load to say Nikon stayed in the manual focus camera market too long. No one forced them to continue production on the F3 for so long, or bring out the FM3A. Those poor guys bought expensive bodies only to be told that Nikon decided to eliminate the mount on all future lens that would allow them to use newer lens on their cameras. No matter what anyone says, that's not fair. When the 200-400 f/4 comes out some of them will probably be upset also.

 

As for crying over it, why is it that when someone sees a problem he's crying over it? Everyone thinks I'm a jerk, so be it. But the truth of the matter is that even if you own the oldest Canon Eos body, it will accept and fully work with the EF series of lens. That way all the Canon EOS users can buy the newest lens. Canon will sell more lens.

 

All moves like this do is irritate a lot of Loyal Nikon users. I think it shows a fundmental shift Nikon's commitment to their users. Let's be honest. If Nikon had stopped making manual bodies 7 or 10 years ago you could understand this. But they didn't. Even if the new "G" mount would work on all the AF bodies Nikon has made, it wouldn't be so bad. But it won't. The F4, N90s, N70, and so on and so on.

 

All I say is it's unfair of Nikon, and it will hurt them to some degree. Maybe Rob, Carl, and many others don't care, But allot of people do. It's just another mistake they are making.

 

Just my opinion

 

Josh

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"I want the 70-200 f2.8 VR with an aperture ring."

--Scott Warn<br>

</em><br>

Get an AF 80~200/2.8D ED and a monopod then sit down an have a

little cry.<br>

<br>

I dont care about the cheap G lenses but since I have an F2As,

FE2(s) and FM2n(s) the AF-S 70~200/2.8G ED-IF VR and the coming

AF-S 200~400/4.0G ED-IF VR bug the hell out of me. I do have two

bodies that accept these new lenses. Yes I know AF, VR and such

dont work on the FE2(s) and FM2n(s) but I often carry an FE2

as a backup to my F5 and I damned well like that.<br>

<br>

If we bitch enough Nikon may continue making a token number of

non-G lenses and if nothing else it bugs the hell out of those

who love the subcommand dial. Gather the villagers, light the

torches, the creature is loose!

[Carl Stone]

"Maybe Rob, Carl, and many others don't care,"

 

Care? What has that got to do with anything? The G lens is a fact, and caring isn't

going to change that. Nikon didn't ask Rob or me what we thought about it, or about

anything else either. Canon doesn't care either, they regularly make equipment that

isn't compatible with old stuff, and by now they've probably forgotten what an

aperture dial on a lens is.

 

The only thing that Rob and I, among others, have done is to move on, and stop

jousting at windmills. If folks want to go to Canon, do it, and quit whining. Nobody

cares if you switch, and it isn't going to put Nikon out of business.

[ShunCheung]

You know, the main problem is that long-time Nikon users have been so spoiled by the excellent compatibility Nikon has been providing such that they feel that it is their birth right to use a 2003 lens on a 1970 body. In reality, between 1980 and 2000, major brands such as Canon and Minolta both have changed their respective lens mounts so that a 2003 Canon EF lens cannot be used on a 1970 Canon FD body. Even Hasselblad has finally introduced a modern H1 which is completely incompatible with the traditional Hasselblads.

 

As I said in another thread, things do change over time. Modern lenses don't have any mechanical coupling and aperture rings any more. It is about time for Nikon to gradually phase out those old mechanical couplings that are more prone to failure. To me, the aperture ring is an annoying carry over from the past and once in a while, it slips out of the minimum setting and gives me that stupid FEE. I intend to buy G lenses exclusively in the future.

 

The fact of matter is that G lenses are a reality and are in fact selling quite well. I agree with Carl that those who think Canon is better should switch to Canon. Just keep in mind that a 2003 Canon EF-S 18-55mm zoom cannot be used on a 2003 EOS 10D body. Those who have a lot of complaints will probably have things to complain about Canon too once they switch.

[elliot]

I realize that the decision to introduce only lenses without aperture rings is financially motivated. Nikon wants us to buy new camera bodies that will be able to function fully and normally with the new lenses they introduce. That is the one and only reason for the decision. In some ways this sucks - as far as compatability with older cameras. But in other ways, it really sucks.<P>I prefer to run my cameras in aperture priority. It is easy and ergonomically to change the settings on the aperture ring in full stops. With just a turn of the wrist, you can go from wide open to stopped all the way down. You can go from one end, to the other, and back again in no time flat. Without an aperture ring, youre screwed if you use your camera like I do.<P>Nikon places the sub-command dial on their cameras VERY un-ergonomically. Furthermore, if you want your camera to meter accurately to 1/3 or 1/2 stops, you have to spin the sub-command dial 2 or 3 times as much to change the aperture the same amount. I would feel better about it if 1. Nikon cameras had the sub-command dial placed ergonomically on the top of the camera like Canon and Minolta, 2. it would be possible to program your camera so that you could adjust the aperture in full stops via the (ergonomically placed) sub-command dial, while retaining metering accuracy to the nearest 1/3 stop in the corresponding shutter speed. Even with these modifications, it would be slower to use the camera than with the aperture ring, but at least the cameras would be reasonably useable without aperture rings instead of totally crappy.

[josh a.]

"To me, the aperture ring is an annoying carry over from the past and once in a while, it slips out of the minimum setting and gives me that stupid FEE. I intend to buy G lenses exclusively in the future." - Shun

 

i certainly understand, and appreciate your view. But, how many camera bodies do you own that will not function with the "G" lens? i recall you owning a F5, and I believe a D100. Both of those will work with a "G" lens. So, respectfully, your perspective may be different from many others.

 

What Scott and i are talking about is the fact that many other Nikon cameras, some still in the line, won't work on the next generation of lens. I'm sorry, but not everyone can afford a F5 or F100. Some people like their F4s, n6006, and N90s and F3 etc.

 

Shun, you may not like me, and we often disagree. But I know your a fair person. Do you really think it's fair that those people with older bodies can no longer use the next generation of Nikon lens? Will you say it's fair that a person who saved their money and bought the new FM3A, and now is locked out from using the next generation of Nikon Lens, just because Nikon didn't want to incorporate a aperture ring? Or what about the guy who bought a new F3?

 

You can't compare the new digital only Canon lens, because it is an entry level lens, designed as a started lens for the digital camera. The digital Rebel in fact. The new series of "G" lens include many pro grade lens. I'm sorry but that's not a apple to apple comparison.

 

Sure Canon has made changes in the past. But they stopped making Manual bodies, Nikon still caries them in their line. Any EoS or Elan body will fully use any of the EF lens. They don't make a body, and then say: well you can't use or newest lens on it. All the new "pro" grade lens from Canon will fit all the EOS bodies. Only the one "entry level" digital EF lens won't. That certainly isn't the same as all of Nikon's new lens won't fit most of the Camera bodies they've ever made. They won't even work on several of the bodies now in production.

 

Maybe Nikon did spoil people, but no one forced them to make manual cameras. They could have easily retired all manual bodies at least 5 years ago. They didn't. But even that doesn't explain why they designed a lens mount that won't work on the recent AF cameras.

 

Carl, if you and Rob and others, feel comfortable with the change in attitiude by Nikon. So be it. But alot of us don't. But, You can do something, voice an opinion. Refuse to buy Nikon lens until they change their attitude. They are the ones making camera bodies that won't meter their own lens. If enought people make a stand, they will listen. If you don't, it will only get worse. What are you going to do if they only bring out lens in "DX" format, because they want to force you into buying a digital?? Often new lens incorporate new designs and elements that everyone should be able to benefit from.

 

What Scott is saying is true. Stand up for you fellow Nikon users who are being treated unfairly. Or don't you think better glass with better technology is for everyone, weither they can afford the big gun cameras or not? That's really what's at stake here.

 

Josh

[Carl Stone]

"What Scott is saying is true. Stand up for you fellow Nikon users who are being

treated unfairly. Or don't you think better glass with better technology is for

everyone, weither they can afford the big gun cameras or not? That's really what's at

stake here. "

 

Well, I'll say one thing, you certainly are melodramatic. Josh, your argument has more

holes than swiss cheese. You act like you're on a mission to abolish slavery or

something. For one thing, you cannot afford all of the non G lenses available to

choose from. So, instead of using what's out there, you snivel about what isn't.

There's nothing noteworthy "at stake" with regard to using G lenses with older

cameras. You are not forced to do so, and you can do it with non-G MF or AF lenses.

A lot of the complaining is coming from folks that do have a G lens compatible

camera, but are they satisfied? No, they want to carry more cameras, and piss and

moan because they don't all have the same capabilities. They gush over thier F3HP,

etc., and sing it's praises over newer cameras. Then they cry like a baby when their

outdated camera is obsoleted as far as new technology goes. Does the newer

technology render their older camera useless? No, and now they are getting their

panties in a wad over progress.

 

I'm not upset with Nikon, and I'm not in support of childish behavior. Why don 't you

cry to Rolls Royce and tell them they aren't fair because they don't make a car that

you can afford. Waa, waa, waa.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Here the 105mm still works on all the Nikon F mount cameras. It is very light; looks goofy; and will work probably 50 years from now on an Nikon F mount slr. It is actually a good portrait lens; and is only a 3 element design. It does have an aperture ring; and has to be stopped down by hand for each exposure. This lens is alot faster to focus than a 105mm F2.5 ; it has a fast helix; and is super easy to quickly focus. The "Mountain Nikkor" is only an F4; but has no hangups with new things like auto diaphrames; prongs; AI conversions; AF; S or even G mounts. <A HREF=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-232.jpg target = "_blank">

<IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/thumbs/tripods-232-thumb.jpg BORDER=0></A>

[michael_devoue]

Re: the Sub-Command dial- very ergonomic IMO- canon's is backward with it above the shutter button. Main- Thumb. Shutter release- Index. Sub- Middle. Index always on the shutter button, I agree. SUB, MIDDLE. SUB, MIDDLE. Lets all say it- Submittal!

 

Re: Aperture rings- Gotta use em on my F3, no doubt. I choose not to on the F100. Why? Because I can lock it when using the body to set it. When my Minolta meter says F/4 and 6 tenths or whatever, I can come very close. Yes, I know I can set an infinite number of settings with the ring, I can't lock it. All studio shooters should understand.

 

I don't feel threatened by the apperance of the G's. I feel threatened by the disappearance of the aperture rings.

 

I chose Nikon for battery independent reasons. Throw out the aperture ring and throw out this possiblity.

 

When Nikon has stopped production on all bodies requiring a ring, then it's time to worry. Nikon's AF primes (non-DX) all have rings. Nikon still makes more primes than zooms, too. I can't imagine a G prime unless it's (of course) a DX.

 

Above all, I hope to god Nikon realizes that many F5 and F100 owners will sometimes use an FM2 or F3.

 

Yes, we understand that change is inevitable, but cost-savings isn't why the 70-200 has no ring. VR maybe, but the 80-400 did. These high-end lenses should have them, and there is no legit(IMO) reason it can't. So it will gain size- who cares? Cost? really........

 

Thank god they're leaving the primes alone.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"It is about time for Nikon to gradually phase out

those old mechanical couplings that are more prone to failure."

--Shun Cheung<br>

</em><br>

So you feel that Nikon should obsolete all current Nikon F

Bayonet Cameras and Lenses including current and about to be

released G types such as the AF-S 200~400/4.0G ED-IF VR? The

Aperture Coupling Lever on ALL Nikon F Bayonet cameras stops down

the lens to the taking aperture via the Aperture Stop-Down Lever.

This is a mechanical coupling. It is in my experience with over

40 Nikkor lenses a total reliable system. I sure hope you meant

something different from what you said.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

Shun you dont have a system that includes a large number of

AI type cameras and AI lenses and you dont find the

subcommand dial inefficient so you arent motivated towards

compatibility. This doesnt make your logic correct or your

opinion better than anyone elses.<br>

<br>

If you dont like the aperture ring slipping out of minimum

setting fix it. If that bother me Id have done that back in

1990 on my first AF lens a AF 60/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. This is not

idle talk, I would have done it and I would have done it in 1990.<br>

<br>

Ill go one better I just semi-permanently locked the

aperture control ring on my AF 50/1.8 Nikkor to f/22 using the

excess material surrounding Radio Shack Cat. No 64-2364 Self-Sticking

Cushion Feet. For tools I used straight backed razor blade and a

paperclip with one end bent straight. It took me about three

minutes to find the tools and materials, mostly in or on my desk,

and less than one minute to do the job. It looks great and no one

will know unless I show this to them and tell them how I did it.

Ill leave it this way for the next 90 days since I have a

50/1.8 AI Nikkor that I prefer using on any of my cameras AI or

AF. If I use the AF 50/1.8 Ill use the subcommand dial.<br>

<br>

In time the adhesive could gum up. I Ive locked a similar

switch on a pair of Craftsman Mini Drivers (cordless screwdrivers)

using PERMATEX® ULTRA BLACK® OEM Hi-Temp RTV Gasket Maker 598B

available in a 3.35 oz (95g) carded tubes at better auto parts

stores. It can be applied with a wooden toothpick or the broken

stem of a Q-Tip Cotton Swab and removed with a wooden toothpick.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

For those who argue that Nikon should break their advertising

pledge and screw loyal customer try having a little empathy. At

some point the tables will be turned and youll be the one

getting screwed and someone new to whatever will be making

unnecessarily rude remarks about you.<br>

<br>

Cheers!

[gerhard_engelbrecht]

Correct me if I'm wrong but if one was to drop a lens while the aperture is fully closed ie: f-22 it could bend the blades and cause them to jam. Now someone mentioned that the G lenses are stopped down if not used on the newer cameras. Do these lenses remain in the stopped down postion when not mounted to a camera? If so and you were to drop one it could become useless. I once accidentally dropped a 90mm Tamron Macro lens. It was wide open at the time and the only damage was a broken UV filter. If the aperture blades are jammed in the open position you could use ND filters to compensate if you run out of faster shutter speeds. Therefore all my lenses are stored wide open and focus set at infinty.

[tcb.photo]

IS it Fair...........No Josh it isn't fair. But there are a lot of things that aren't fair. Do I like the fact that the new "G" mount lens won't work properly on my F3......No Josh I don't. Do I think it was a mistake ........Yes I do think that it will cost them a few supporters.

 

So even if I did agree with your major points, at least the non rambling points, what do you want us to do? Nikon is aware that some of their users aren't happy with the change. They didn't see it as a big deal. Well for you and Scott it is. But, you'll just going to have to get over it. I don't like it, but I'll just have to live with it.

 

You can scream and argue and be a nasty little ....all you want. It won't change a thing. Nikon spent lots of money on research and development on the new mount. It's part of their long range planning. It's not some "cloak and dagger" plan to drive all their users to Digital. As shun pointed out on another thread they lost some people because they slipped behind Canon the Pro digital market. This battles over, accept it and move on. If you want to buy Canon stuff, it's your right to do so. But don't preach to us that we should do the same.

 

If you really think about it most manual camera users prefer prime lens. You need only read the list to see that. Nikon still makes AIS lens, mostly prime lens. For me it was a matter of convenience, being able to use all my lens on all my bodies. Well I just have to deal with, if I buy a new "G" Zoom.

 

Scott, it's a noble offer to pay more for a "D" mount. The real problem is that for Nikon to start an entire production line to make two version of the same lens would cost so much money, and create so much loss, it just can't be done. For them to be able to break even, ever person with a non compatible camera would have to buy the lens.

 

I really believe the people "hurt" the most will be the owners of the older AF bodies, like the N8008, F4, N90 and all the rest. Manual camera owners always seem to levitate toward primes anyway. Leica is a classic example of that.

 

Sorry guys, but it's time you get over it. I don't mean to be nasty. I agree, but it isn't going to change it. Move on and spend your time improving your art

[michael_devoue]

Gerhard-

 

I'm very sure that storing the lenses at f/22 won't harm the blades- if anything it increases it's strength- their formation moves more like one unit, versus several independent leaves. Those individual leaves glide in thier own track, however, so it doesn't matter much.

 

Three years ago a small backpack with a "forgotten" 180/2.8 AF-n enclosed was thrown over a creek. I remembered the instant it left my hand- it impacted on the mount side, with a rear cap on. Set @ f/11 (I remeber quite well), but i couldn't mount it for the next three days, so in a way I spent the time eagerly awaiting my return to work because...

 

At the time I was working for a repair shop with access to all the cool test equipment. It was carefully inpected on monday and suprisingly, only the lens mount and aperture ring needed replacing. Two weeks later the lens was repaired and tested, and to my surprise, the optics were perfectly aligned, and yes, the diaphragm tested out perfect. I was thrilled! Until that moment, I was sure that I would eventually replace it, but it still lives in my bag and has paid for itself over and over and over.

 

I haven't seen the potential problem you point out Gerhard, but I'm not saying it's impossible- an exposed diaphragm can be forced to close up star-trek style, but I don't think it's likely in an assembled, working lens.

[ShunCheung]

Actually, G lenses work on the F4, N8008 and N90 in the P and S modes. In particular, because of Flex Program on the N8008 and N90, there is little difference among A, S, and P. So the one mode you really miss is M. The only bodies that are really not compatible are the MF bodies designed in 1980 and before (including the FM3A which carries on the 1977 FM design). Personally I find the demand to use an AF-S VR lens on an MF body from 20+ years ago quite unreasonable. That is why Scott's original argument is very weak. He wants VR, and VR requires an F5 or later body anyway. It is his desire to use a 2003 G lens on a 1970 F2 that is causing problems.

 

What Nikon needs to do is to balance old and new customers. Why should all new customers who buy new AF bodies get lenses with an aperture ring that is totally useless to them and they might even need to glue it down? There is hardly anything sillier that you can tell your customers and it'll just drive them to other brands.

 

David, I am not suggesting my arguments are any better than yours, but neither are your any better than mine. All I am saying is that there are also a lot of people who prefer G lenses and that is exactly why they are selling so well. (For example, you can ask our own Chuck Fan, who has bought a 24-85 G, 70-200 G and 24-120 G all in just over a year.) G lenses are a reality in life and let's stop this useless whining. (By the way, I hope Nikon will eventually phase out the Aperture Coupling Lever because that is somewhat prone to failure too. I just saw one case 2 months ago. But that will be a difficult transitioin to phase it out and is really another topic.)

 

Joshua, you knew very well that it is a false statement that all EOS lenses work on all EOS bodies. Please don't say that again and also stop making excuses for Canon. Moreover, it is also a false statement that G lenses don't work on the F4, N8008, and N90.

 

I cannot agree more with Rob. It is time to get over it. After introducing AF in the late 1980's, Nikon has provided full compatibility between AF and MF for well over a decade before starting to move on. Most of Nikon's competitors didn't even provide one day of compatibility between AF and MF. If that is still not good enough for you, please switch to another brand and bring your whining to their fourm.

[tcb.photo]

I didn't know that Shun. So if you own a f4s or N90s, etc. you can use the G lens in Program modes, and still change the aperture/shutter speed of the lens? Is that correct? Or will the S amd P modes only "function" based on the aperture of f/22?

 

Now I find this discussion educational. If you can change aperture through the P mode by use of the control dial, or by changing shutter speeds and having the the corresponding aperture automatically set, that's no so bad for the guys who own the older AF bodies. It won't do anything for my F3, but life does go on.

 

Shun, or anyone, do you know will the AF-s and VR chartaristics function on those older AF bodies. I'm curious about that.

 

Rob

[ShunCheung]

Rob, I wrote my earlier comment very carefully. On the N8008(s) and N90(s), there is a command dial (but no sub-command dial). If you set your camera to the P mode, there is the "Flex Program" option to use the command dial to select different aperture/shutter speed combinations. For example, if the program mode selects 1/125 sec and f8, you can rotate the command dial to switch to 1/60 sec f11, 1/30 sec f16 or 1/250 sec f5.6, etc., all equivalent exposures. So effectly you can control the aperture that way. (Rob, on your F100, it has the same Flex Program also.) There is no command dial on the F4 and therefore no Flex Program.

 

On any one of the bodies mentioned above, you can also select the S mode and adjust the shutter speed until it gives you the desired aperture. So yes, you can still indirectly control the aperture on a G lens, even on an F4. However, with a G lens, the M mode will only work on a body with the sub-command dial so that you can directly control the aperture; otherwise, you are stuck at f22 or whatever the minimum happens to be.

 

The F4 and N90(s) can drive AF-S lenses but the N8008(s) cannot. So any AF-I/AF-S lens becomes MF only on an N8008(s). VR requires bodies with 5 or more AF points (11 in the case of D2H) to work. Hence only bodies from the F5 on can have VR capability. In other words, there is no VR on the F4, N8008 and N90.

 

Now Rob, could you explain why you are using an F3 and an F100? What does the F3 bring to the table that an F100 doesn't?

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"By the way, I hope Nikon will eventually phase out

the Aperture Coupling Lever" --Shun Cheung<br>

</em><br>

Thats what I was afraid of.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"Sorry guys, but it's time you get over it." --Rob

Helm<br>

</em><br>

No, its not time to get over it. Nikon included compatibly

for AI and AIS lenses in the Nikon D2h because of popular

pressure.