andrew_hsiai1

Here is my 2 cents.:)

 

<p>

 

The ideal strategy for Nikon is to incorporate SW motors in

almost every lens like Canon EOS. Thus, how quickly (or if) Nikon can

learn to mass produce SW motors cheaply will be key in shaping this

two tier lens system in the future.

 

<p>

 

Since no one that I have spoken with (including Nikon Reps) can

provide me any details on SW motors in terms of cost, complexity and

design similarities with Canon USM (I read that Canon adopted USM from

University Experiments), I will have to take a speculative approach.

 

<p>

 

This speculative approach is to examine Canon's motor progress

from a relative cost basis and predict Nikon's strategy. Since 1987,

Canon has basically 5 types:

 

<p>

 

1. AFD eg. 80-200L

2. USM ring type with electronic MF eg. 600 f4 85 f1.2 (it fits only

large diameter lenses)

3. MM (Mirco Motor) eg. 100 f2.8 Marco

4. USM (ring type) eg. 28-70 f2.8

5. USM MM eg. 50 f1.4

 

I am going to assume based on the lenses that they are

incorporated in the following cost structure: USM with ele. MF > USM >

USM MM.

Because of these three types of motors, USM is available to

lenses with broad pricing points.

 

<p>

 

Now, based on the AF preformance of the AFS

lenses(300,400,500,600), I am going to assume that SW motor cost =>

USM with ele. MF. If Nikon can not produce a different and cheaper

version of SW motor, then, there will be a distinct two tier lens

system with SW lenses costing a premium. However, if Nikon can

overcome this technical feat, the stage is set for cheaper AFS lenses

in the future. Perhaps AFS 180 f2.8 costing only $150 more than EF

200II F2.8L is possible.

 

<p>

 

Since I have not inspected the new AFS zooms, I do not know

whether they incorporate a different type of SW motor than that of

AFS600.

 

<p>

 

Apart from a technical breakthrough, I doubt that we will see SW

motors in consumer grade lenses any time soon.

 

<p>

 

Again, I think the development of SW motor technology will set

the course for Nikon's two tier lens system's future.

Whenever Nikon uses the "IF" designation, it usually means that the

elements/groups that are used in focusing reside between the front &

rear elements/groups of the lens.

 

<p>

 

The two-touch Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 by that definition is not a true

"IF". If you were to look at the front elements of this lens during

focusing, you could see that these elements move back and forth.

However, the outer barrel does not rotate or move. This design

facilitates filter usage.

 

<p>

 

By constrast, Canon 70-200 f2.8 is a true "IF". During focusing, you

could see inner elements/groups move with the outer glass fixed in its

position.

 

<p>

 

Keep in mind that there are many Nikkor rear focusing lens and do not

carry the "IF" designation.

Thank you Danny for all your help!:)

Danny, your reponse has helped greatly. I am now deciding to buy the

US model instead because EC-B screens cost $93.50 and US model in only

$100 more. However, there is one thing I do no understand. Does the

discoloration of EC-B occur due to both passage of time and usage?

For example, if a F5 was left in shelf of a store for 3 years with no

usage, will discoloration still happen?

 

<p>

 

Why do you use the E screen? It it just because you do not want

discoloration or are there some benefits of using the E screen?

 

<p>

 

Thanks

Under what conditions will discoloration of the EC-B occur on the Nikon F5? I have only read about the problem. I just bought a grey Nikon F5 and have tested out the metering, batteries etc.. All 5 rolls were exposed well and all other functions worked perfectly. However, I am wondering how serious this discoloration of the EC-B screen could get? Does changing a new EC-B screen solve the problem? Is it worth paying $100 more for the US model so that this problem could be fixed if it happens? Thank you for your help.