My beef with the "g" mount

[david_h._hartman]

<em>"I am NOT happy that Nikon is taking away features, or flexibility from me or any of their other customers." --Eric

Bogaerts<br>

</em><br>

At least Nikon has made provisions for AI and AIS lenses in the D2h. I think Nikon is walking a tightrope and knows it. I do waffle back and forth on what I think Nikons motives are but then I think they are doing the same.<br>

<br>

<em>"...there may be technical reasons why Nikon didn't put an aperture ring on the 70-200/2.8." --Jim MacKenzie<br>

</em><br>

Having been inside a dozen or more AI and AIS lenses I wonder if an aperture ring in an AF-S, VR lens might be very complicated, i.e. the VR and aperture control mechanism may want the same space.<br>

<br>

If Nikon does not convert the whole line to AF-S G VR but keeps making AF-D and AF-S lenses and introduces new ones then things wont be particularly bad (for me). Of course all the lenses I really want may be AF-S G VR.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

Ive wondered if there is a *safe* and *easy* way to *entice* a G type lens to shoot wide open, yes wide open only on an AI body. The thought is that I would almost certainly use the upcoming AF-S 200~400/4.0G ED-IF VR at an aperture of f/4.0 or f/5.6. It is typical to use wild glass wide open or nearly so. If the lens only worked at f/4.0 "stop-down metering" would be no problem. All Id loose on an FE2 w/ MD-12 is f/5.6, AF and VR. All Id really like is f/5.6 (or could logicly expect).<br>

<br>

Now some fool (err kind and wise soul) is going ask are you really going to spend $5,000 to $7,000.00 or more on that lens? Well Ive been busting my ass and have $1,000.00 dollars saved (which might go to some unforeseen dental or auto expense) or another lens in the super-telephoto class but perhaps. Even though its a G-D G-VR lens? Perhaps.<br>

<br>

My current poor mans super-telephoto is a 300/4.5 ED-IF AI with TC-16A (will some of you have the decency to console me). Ive wanted to get out to 400~500mm (with a real lens) for years. If I wasnt a fool Id have bought a 200~400/4.0 AIS on close-out but I bought a 27" TV, and two CD players for about the $2,495.00 that the 200~400/4.0 AIS closed out at (sigh). For whatever reason I didnt know it was being closed out.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

For those who cant figure out why Id prize full compatibility of lenses and cameras from 1977 to 2003 (at least in the ones Ive bought) I give you the 25~50/4.0 AI/AIS. Of course that lens only had a 5 year run because it wasnt small and light, had a big 72mm filter attachment, being a 2x zoom it lacked zoom appeal and cost well over $500.00 till it closed out. Few knew that the lens could do, few know now. AF? in a landscape or a wide angle lens, I can take it or leave it. I suppose I failed here too.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

<em>"If I can't be brilliant, at least I can be verbose."

--Todd Peach<br>

</em><br>

Thank You! Thank You! I think of this statement every time I

ramble on like this.

[astcell]

I havea D-100, F5 and FM. The FM does not rely on batteries, my logic being that when space aliens fly over and all the cameras are dead from their ray beams I can still get pictures of the UFO because my FM is not battery dependent. Yea, I know I am weird, but that FM has been around since 1978! And there ARE times when batteries do die. I have had my cameras splashed and short circuited, and I once thought my nicads were brand new but they were dead. So when batteries in the body die (or if I want quiet operation), I whip out the FM. Now it only makes sense that I get to use ALL my lenses with ALL my bodies! Isn't that what Nikon promised everyone? Down with G lenses! I bought the 80-400 mostly because it is NOT a G lens!

[chuck]

hee hee hee....

[ShunCheung]

One "hee" for each G lens you bought, Chuck? :-)

[Carl Stone]

" Now it only makes sense that I get to use ALL my lenses with ALL my bodies! Isn't

that what Nikon promised everyone?"

 

Please produce the resource for that alledged promise, or stop with the

uncorroborated adlibs. IF, you manage to do that, then tell it to Nikon, because

frankly I'm tired of this sniveling from a bunch spoiled ingrates.

[ebogaerts]

Do you work for Nikon, Carl? :)

 

Kinda sounds like it..

 

If not, how many "G" lenses and camera bodies without AI prongs have you paid good money for? :)

[Carl Stone]

"Do you work for Nikon, Carl? :)

 

 

Kinda sounds like it.. "

 

No, I don't work for anyone, I'm retired. And when I did work, it was not in the photo

industry, nor in any capacity for Nikon.

 

 

" If not, how many "G" lenses and camera bodies without AI prongs have you paid

good money for? :)"

 

I don't currently own any G lenses, if I want one I'll buy it and use it with whatever

limitations it presents. As for my current bodies, one can use G lenses, and the other

cannot use AFS or VR, and requires

an aperture ring to adjust the apertaure with. That's life.

 

Do you also carry on so when new computer programs are released that aren't

compatible with older computers?

 

We've all sat through innumerable claims that Nikon promised this or that, but we've

not been offered any concrete evidence in support these claims. If Nikon made such

outlandish guarantees, then there shouldn't be a problem with producing them. In the

meantime, all we have is unsubstantiated rhetoric. To sum it up, I'm not interested in

supporting a lot of whining, so if you have a problem, take it to someone that can

help you, and give the rest of us a break. Cry to Nikon, not those of us that just plain

don't care about this silly ass problem.

[chuck]

"One "hee" for each G lens you bought, Chuck? :-)"<p>

 

Have you been furtively monitoring my lens purchasing activities? Shun?

[david_h._hartman]

Im no expedition photographer but anyone that has hiked

15 miles after driving 20 miles from civilization after driving

350 miles from home should have some understanding of the sincere

desire for battery independence (I do). Do you really want to carry a

camera that requires 6 or 8 AA(s) anyway? Wouldnt a couple

three extra lenses be worth more than 6 to 8 frames a second (wildlife

excepted)?<br>

<br>

Ever been 25 miles or more from the nearest pavement on "Warning:

High Clearance FWD Vehicles Only" roads and another 35 miles

by pavement to the nearest place where one might buy AA alkaline

batteries? <br>

<br>

If you live in Manhattan, New York and can buy batteries at 3:07

AM and that just around the corner (walking distance) please try

to understand. There are very legitimate reasons for owning

battery independent cameras and there always will be (or so I

surmise).<br>

<br>

Here is what Daniel Bayer said regarding the Nikon FM3a...<br>

<br>

<em>"This camera has been designed and produced almost

specificaly for the rough and remote photojournalist. The likes

of Gordon Wiltse, Galen Rowell and my friend Ace Kvale and myself

have practically requested this model for mountaineering and long

term expedition photography. It's a no-brainer for ultra long

time exposures too.<br>

<br>

The Nikon FM3A is a brilliant new camera, quite the security

blanket too."<br>

</em><br>

I can understand why Shun does not like the minimum aperture

locks. Thats why I have made suggestions for solving the

problem. Since I use both AI/AIS lenses and AF lenses on the F5

without using custom setting 22:1 I personally would just set the

aperture with the aperture control ring and in fact that just

what Ive done on occasion. I wouldn't stop to change the

aperture control lock.<br>

<br>

Shun it may appear that Im just trying to be a pain by

making suggestions but though I do play the fool from time to

time I really do try to help folks solve problems. That is the

primary reason why I keep making these suggestions. You are of

course free to speculate on my secondary motivation :)<br>

<br>

With few exceptions, its easier for those who dont

need or want an aperture control ring to overcome problems with

it as compared to putting one on a lens, one that came without

one, for those who absolutely need one.

[leif_goodwin8]

Removing the aperture ring allows Nikon to improve its cameras and lenses, and electronically activated apertures might be cheaper to make. It might also make it easier to produce a waterproof seal between camera and lens given only electronic contacts.

 

However, what we are now suffering is a right royal pain due to Nikon changing their system.